[HOT] Fwd: Re: landuse=residential within landuse=residential

Vao Matua vaomatua at gmail.com
Wed Mar 29 12:03:13 UTC 2017


Thomas, thank you for the thoughts.

I have looked at the building=farm and landuse=farmyard and believe they do
not apply in here in Ethiopia.A building that is a dwelling should not be
tagged as "farm". It is not possible to determine the use of a building
from aerial imagery. Last week I was in a village and a building that
looked like a house also had a room that was where livestock were kept at
night. In the same way similar looking buildings could function as a small
store (kiosk). I would like to stick with building=yes, but also have a
landuse tag that is useful for cartography, but also humanitarian uses like
malaria elimination, or population estimates.
I would also suggest that boundary is not a good idea in Africa.  In the
next decade it is predicted that there will be a huge migration shift to
cities, the places these people will live will be outside of existing
administrative boundaries. My opinion is that HOT stick with landuse as we
see it and let those with authoritative information create the boundaries.

Emmor

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Thomas Hills <tomphills at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Firstly this is my first post to the HOT mailing list so I should
> introduce myself. I'm Tom Hills (http://www.openstreetmap.org/
> user/Thomas%20Hills) and I got involved through Missing Maps London in
> August 2014. I'm not a GIS, humanitarian or coding specialist so I'm just a
> plain old normal volunteer.
>
> Majka, I agree with you that landuse=residential isn't particularly useful
> in the region Emmor quoted. The wiki suggests that it is for an area which
> has predominantly residential buildings. It says that it should not be used
> as 'an abstract wrapper around buildings grouping them without a difference
> between residential landuse within and other landuses around being
> observable'. I know the wiki isn't infallible but that sounds relatively
> sensible to me. Of course the region should be mapped in accordance with
> the task instructions, but if I were mapping this outside of HOT I would
> use a different method.
>
> I should probably know this already, but what *is* the method for
> estimating population density within HOT? I imagined it used building count
> rather than residential area size. Is there a diary entry on this?
>
> Continuing the thought, I am unaware of how long the three or more
> buildings 'rule' has been around in HOT, but I remember it from my first
> Missing Maps mapathons in 2014. This discussion seems to be a good time to
> ask: Has anyone recently reviewed the utility and relevance of the rule for
> HOT purposes?
>
> Emmor: There's specific tags for farms, e.g. building=farm and
> landuse=farmland. From what I gather from what you've said and shown, I
> think that they might be appropriate instead of your
> agriculture_residential and pastoral_agriculture landuse proposals.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
>
> On 29 March 2017 at 09:33, majka <majka.zem+talk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> First, overlapping landuse areas (even different ones) should *always*
>> be corrected. It brings problems with the map data, I have seen and
>> corrected areas where the overlapping did hide ponds from the rendered map.
>> The *same* overlapping area masks some of the problems but should be
>> corrected as well - either by deleting of one of the areas or by merging
>> both together.
>>
>> The next question is the landuse *size* in the mapped area.
>>
>> From the view of the mapper in Europe, the landuse=residential in HOT is
>> problematic. The residential area should be only where the region is used *above
>> all* for housing people. The HOT use is to mark areas where there are
>> *some* houses, depending on the project instructions. This ends with a
>> very problematic rendering of some areas. Visually, you get one big blob of
>> something most people understand as a town, not the reality of fields and
>> farms. The very loose residential areas shouldn’t be there at all, IMHO.
>> Villages/towns boundaries have their own tag, *boundary*. Usually, this
>> is paired with boundary=administrative which is mostly unusable for HOT
>> distance mapping because the information isn't available to the mapper. But
>> nothing speaks against own tag - see here
>> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:boundary>.
>>
>> IMHO, the ideal solution would be to change the HOT practice of mapping
>> residential areas. Leave landuse=residential only to the areas, where the
>> buildings are densely packed together (even in a village, where there is
>> *real* street there might be a residential area) - keeping the common
>> interpretation. Give the residential area a lower importance than it has
>> now, and start using the boundary instead, for example boundary=residential
>> to mark the areas with buildings. A later mapping on the ground or use of
>> governmental data if available could then change this in real
>> administrative areas marking the hamlets, villages, and towns where
>> appropriate and leaving the *residential* boundaries to the rural farm
>> areas.
>>
>> Ideally, such change would be preceded by discussing on the HOT and
>> tagging list and followed by updating the wiki definition of a boundary,
>> and by updating the HOT materials for users. It would need a slight change
>> in JOSM HOT presets and in the iD editor as well, probably. However, it
>> shouldn’t be very difficult to do so.
>>
>> I understand the residential areas are used for getting population
>> density in the HOT projects. The use of both tags together would be a
>> better choice, getting the information about sparsely and densely populated
>> areas at the same time.
>>
>> Majka
>>
>> On 29 March 2017 at 08:10, Vao Matua vaomatua at gmail.com
>> <http://mailto:vaomatua@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>>
>> Nick & John,
>>
>> Determining where to draw the edge of landuse=residential can be
>> difficult.
>> Here in Ethiopia most of the population lives in a rural setting where
>> they farm areas of 1 to 10 hectares in size.
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/6.9634/38.4408
>> There are places where people live in villages, but often dwellings are
>> quite dispersed.
>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20170329/5355d7d0/attachment.html>


More information about the HOT mailing list