[OSM-dev] [OSM-talk-nl] AND conv: residential versus unclassified
Martijn van Oosterhout
kleptog at gmail.com
Wed Aug 29 10:15:30 BST 2007
On 8/29/07, ante at ffii.org <ante at ffii.org> wrote:
> In NL we have two parties, the Residentials and the Unclassifieds.
Actually, you missed the third group: people like me who beleive that
residential=(unclassified+abutters=residential) and as such the tag
should be abolished altogether. And that perhaps the abutters tag
should be abolished also, in favour of areas.
> Now with the AND import coming soon, we have to decide how to converse AND
> local streets, to residential or unclassified.
We firstly, the AND contains areas describing industrial zones and
such so you can easily see where people live. This is a far better
solution than tag roads.
And secondly, unless you see a way to look at the data and determine
one way or the other, we have to make either *all* streets
unclassified or *all* street residential. I think you'll agree that
the former choice is obviously better.
> So, is there actually an intelligent design behind residential versus
> unclassified, or is it just survival of the fittest? Can we look for
> guidance, or will there be no answer?
Well, as far as the renderers are concerned, they agree with the third
position, have for months and don't appear to be changing their mind.
In the long run though, I don't think it matters.
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog at gmail.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/
More information about the dev
mailing list