<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On May 15, 2015, at 8:02 PM, pmailkeey . <<a href="mailto:pmailkeey@googlemail.com" class="">pmailkeey@googlemail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">area IS landuse - it has to be (landuse=ocean !!!!) so we get landuse=building even. </div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div></blockquote></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Uhhh. <b class="">What?</b> This is a clear about-face on the landuse tag then. Everywhere is clearly not a landuse. Most of the earth is not altered nor designated nor segregated for a specific use.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I can define an “area” of the world. But if there are no purposeful alterations for a task, designations of purpose, nor manmade buildings and amenities contained within…. then it is not a landuse. There is no landuse=glacier for a reason. </div><div class="">Most of the ocean is “unused” by people. - they have not changed it to have a specific purpose, nor altered the water to do a specific job - and it’s pretty hard to have a landuse on an ocean (maybe oceanuse=fish_farm?) That would be a great "oceanuse" tag- there are plenty of floating, manmade, use-specific, designated-to-be fish farms around the world. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">They take up what… .01% of the ocean? the rest of the ocean has no man-altered, segregated, designated use (besides political ones) - but those are not “on the ground” in reality (like a fish farm or a oyster farm).</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I have no idea where you get the notion that area=landuse. land… *used* for a task. being a woods or a mountain or a lake is not the “job” or “designated purpose” of the area. It just is. hence the natural= tag. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">However, the land around a school building, usually fenced in, <b class="">containing the facility and amenities that belong to the facility and designated as such</b> (pitch, walkways, parking, etc) is clearly part of the school - but not a school building. The grounds and the building together make that “school."</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">That <b class="">land</b>…. designated to be <b class="">use</b>d by people… as a school… And which currently is <b class="">altered from it’s natural state</b> … to be a school ground… and has an <b class="">area easily defined</b>… as a school… should be “<b class="">landuse</b>=school” </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The drinking fountain, toilets, parking, gym, and other location level amenities are amenities of the school - and should continue to be tagged as amenities IMO -</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">or should we have a tiiiiny little 30x30cm squares marked as landuse=drinking water? Landuse=shoe_rack? Landuse=fire_extingusher? It’s just as asinine as landuse=glacier.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Which leads us to this statement:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">So that raises the question as to whether 'landuse' adds any info value in tags to the object being mapped. 'Building' clearly does.</div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div class="">?????????????????????????? </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">when you map out only the buildings, you get a bunch of lego bricks spilled across the map. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=18/36.38663/139.07087" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=18/36.38663/139.07087</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Even without naming, and using only a single landuse across multiple areas, gives a much clearer idea of what is there. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=18/36.43627/139.04950" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=18/36.43627/139.04950</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Landuse ties them together int he way we already spatially identify them - this is a “school” this is an “apartment complex”… This is a “university” - </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The building+landuse for individual facilities gives you so much more together than just one by itself. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The land and non-building amenities contained within the landuse are as important as the building. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">And… the name=* belongs to the landuse for all larger facilities. A big school (or mall or business complex) with many named buildings, pools, parking, seating, pitches, walkways, and wahatnot…</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">is currently amenity=school + name=FooBar School. (I feel it should be landuse=school). same as landuse=retail name=FooBar OutDoor Mall. Or landuse=industrial name=FooBar Works.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">No single building is actually named the name of the facility - and often is named something else! - so the name=* for the facility doesn’t belong to it. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Even tiny schools. My school has two buildings. Both have the same number of students. Which is named for the school? Neither. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The ground has the name - out on the wall. <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=19/36.40723/139.33257" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=19/36.40723/139.33257</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The name goes on the landuse, which includes the school’s parking, bike racks, hedges, walkways, water tanks, tress, and stairways. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The wall around our perimeter is an an easily mapped and easily defined area boundary. Everything inside is landuse=school - as all of those amenities not only belong to the school, but support the operation of the school. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Are the parking lots around a stadium not part of the stadium? Are the lawns, walkways, quads, and roadways not part of a business complex? What about a hospital with multiple buildings? </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.43591/139.25348" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.43591/139.25348</a> </div><div class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.40791/139.06405" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.40791/139.06405</a> </div><div class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.37886/139.08038" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.37886/139.08038</a></div><div class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=16/36.3295/139.1009" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=16/36.3295/139.1009</a></div><div class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.40860/139.03317" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.40860/139.03317</a> </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Here - there are no buildings (as there are none) - but just rice fields. Doesn’t this make the map much more understandable? All of these are man-altered places designated for a purpose.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><font color="#4787ff" class=""><u class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=19/36.43286/139.25779" class="">http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=19/36.43286/139.25779</a></u></font></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This view that the land somehow lesser than the building, or the name of a large facility somehow belongs to a building (which one? who knows!) instead of the land the facility occupies is subjectively wrong, objectivity wrong, and easily disproved. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Please reevaluate this seriously flawed opinion. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Javbw</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>