Bee wrote:
He was cleared to ROYCE with an altitude.

Yes, but without a route. He was on vectors, and as he clarified
since the first post, he was on a "right base" somewhere outside of
ROYCE when he got the clearance. So how was he to get to ROYCE?

Would it have been totally different had the controller said "turn
final 7 miles out, cross 7 DME at or above 2000, cleared for the
visual runway 12R"?

So, is that a visual prior to ROYCE? If you choose to view it that way,
fine just so long as you cross exactly at ROYCE at, or above, 2,000.

Yes this is how I see it (except that nothing is exact). I don't know
if this is a "proper" clearance or not, but I can't see what else you
would do given that the controller stopped giving vectors. You are on
your own in getting to ROYCE, by GPS direct, by 90 degree intercept of
the localizer and then flying to ROYCE or by flying towards Texas
Southern University and then turning final and descending. The pilot
has to make something up and not crash into anything. That's a visual
approach with an inconvenient restriction.

If, at OAK, you can cross anywhere along the 6 DME at or above 2,000,
that indeed is a visual approach without a route restiction.

SBA example is pure visual with a noise abatement restriction.

Yes I know these aren't exactly the same, I was merely giving examples
of restrictions that don't cause the visual approach to be "not yet
applicable" as you stated before. I still think the "not applicable"
idea is wrong.