<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/6/20 7:22 am, Mateusz Konieczny
via Tagging wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:M8quV-W--3-2@tutanota.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Jun 2, 2020, 20:16 by <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:steveaOSM@softworkers.com">steveaOSM@softworkers.com</a>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid
#93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">
<div>"this IS residential landuse." (Not COULD BE, but IS). Yes,
this land might be "natural" now, including being "treed," but
I could still build a patio and bbq there after perhaps
cutting down some trees, it is my residential land and I am
allowed to do that, meaning it has residential use, even if it
is "unimproved" presently. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>It is a residential property, not a residential landuse.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I have a few trees on my residential property. I use then for;
shade, to sit under, to have a BBQ under, read a book under, think
about things. People park their cars, caravans and boats under
them.</p>
<p>They are part of my home ... they are used by me ... as my
residence. <br>
</p>
<p>If trees are to be excluded from OSM residential landuse, will
grass and flowers be removed too? Are only buildings to be mapped
as residential landuse in OSM? I think that would be ridiculous. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:M8quV-W--3-2@tutanota.com">
<blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid
#93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">
<div>These facts do add to the difficulty: OSM doesn't wish to
appear to be removing property rights from residential
landowners (by diminishing landuse=residential areas)<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>Are there people somehow believing that edits in OSM affect
property rights and may remove them?<br>
</div>
<div>That is ridiculous.<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid
#93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">
<div> but at the same time, significant portions of these areas
do remain in a natural state, while distinctly and presently
"having" residential landuse. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>For me and in my region (Poland) it would be treated as a
clearly incorrect mapping.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Parks here can have scrub, trees, grass and /or flowers - that
does not mean they are not parks because of the land cover. <br>
</p>
<p>I would contend similar consideration by held for residential
landuse. <br>
</p>
</body>
</html>