Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add "unknown" as possible value for access fields #316

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

matkoniecz
Copy link
Contributor

See https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/21705 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dunknown

The access conditions are unknown or unclear and indicates that survey is necessary.

For the access key, where users might assume access rights by definition or some default, this makes it explicit that the actual situation is not known (since an absent access tag might also be mistaken by some users as being compliant to an assumed default). These tags should therefore not be removed without replacing them with a better alternative.

For example data consumers typically assume that amenity=parking without access tags is public, and when mapping from aerial imagery some parking will be likely (but not certainly) access restricted, in such cases tagging them unknown would be a good idea.

recreates #196

After a conversation at STOM about access keys and the need for unknown to be added as a preset in ID. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
@tyrasd
Copy link
Member

tyrasd commented Dec 29, 2021

@matkoniecz we should also include the change to the access_simple field (from #195) in this as well, shouldn't we?

@tyrasd
Copy link
Member

tyrasd commented Jan 4, 2022

merged as 0da5e3e

@tyrasd tyrasd closed this Jan 4, 2022
@tyrasd tyrasd changed the title Update access.json add "unknown" as possible value for access fields Jan 4, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants