Proposal talk:Access=resident
Subkey of private tag (access=private, private=resident) would be more reasonable. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
- That wouldn't work when multiple access keys are used, e.g. foot=vehicle + private=residents + vehicle=private + private=with_key ... oops, private=* comes twice --Fkv (talk) 12:20, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
resident vs. residents
"residents" (plural) is used much more often, analogous to access=customers.
 access=resident |
access=residents |
| vehicle=resident |
vehicle=residents |
| motor_vehicle=resident |
motor_vehicle=residents |
--Fkv (talk) 12:20, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
See also: parking:primary_usage:both=residents parking:condition:both=residents parking:condition:left=residents parking:condition:right=residents etc.
remark on access=destination
That tag has been misused, mistranslated and finally misdocumented horribly. Destination traffic really means that every person may use the road, no matter whether that person gets into contact with residents. The only criterion is that the person stops within that local road network. Destination traffic is the opposite of through traffic. The german translations are "Zielverkehr" (road signs: "Zufahrt gestattet", "Durchfahrt verboten", "ausgenommen Ziele in ...") and "Durchzugsverkehr". --Fkv (talk) 12:20, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Application to a wider scope of objects
I found this proposal when wondering how should I tag an a recycling container that's meant only for the residents of the area. There's often no physical restrictions, but the containers are nonetheless unable to handle waste load from the general public.
Furthermore, there are probably a bunch of other similar objects that share these semantics. E.g. grills, outdoor gyms etc. I should think that this is a rather common case.