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
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
