Hinchliffe (2003*) points to the inhabiting landscape, which is more than a human affair, and should also be recognized by the politics of landscape accessibility. He writes about the politics of inhabitation, which is not simply a matter of liberation of the oppressed, but it is also a matter of experimenting with styles of inhabiting, styles that manage to re-cover and recognize without covering everything. Landscaping as a textual practice can reinvigorate the politics of inhabitation (Hinchliffe, 2003*, p. 215). Hinchliffe points to the construction of the worlds, while experimenting with the landscape. This is important in sense of showing, that the access to the territorial landscape is also discursive, where the social process itself has the meaning of an effect. Social meanings are mediated by the communication process (see Hinchliffe, 2003). Following the thoughts of Hinchliffe, who interprets society as an experiment, not as a contract, then, while conceptualizing landscape accessibility as the spaces for accessibility, why not supplement this concept with the spaces for communication?