On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 08:17:20AM +0200, Arne Johannessen wrote:
> I interpreted "random person" as meaning "random traffic, not destined
> for your uncle's residence".
> 
> But perhaps you meant that the person is in fact a visitor destined
> for your uncle's residence – maybe trying to sell something or
> conducting a poll or whatever – and that doing so would be illegal? If
> so, in what way is it "clear" to the visitor that what they're doing
> is illegal?

I guess 90% of the typical driveways are "cul de sac" anyway - So there
cant be any through traffic. Technically the ones driving on that
way have a clear intent and will be visitors.

So tagging cul-de-sac with destination is nice - but basically a "no
op" for many reasons (Already has penalty in routing, technically no
through traffic possible etc etc)

Thats the point with the whole driveway discussion. Tagging any further
restriction on a driveway does at best change nothing, worst 
case make it unusable. You wont _gain_ anything.

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff                                                 f...@zz.de
        UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to