[Imports] Florida Landuse Import

[Hiausirg]

About the data licence:
I am sure that it is free data, although it doesn't say so explicitly anywhere. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_status_of_works_by_the_government_of_Florida
"[...]the state and its agents are not permitted to claim copyright on its public records[...]" It says that copyright is only claimed on stuff thats "competing with private industries in the commercial realm" I don't see how landuse data competes with anything. Also, the Terms of Use/their disclaimers don't even talk about any copyrights.
I recently wrote them an email (at GIS.Librarian at dep.state.fl.us), questioning if there were any usage restrictions on the open data. The reply:

"Good afternoon,

The data that is made available on our open data portal is provided to the public as a public service. You can find more information about the GIS Data here https://ca.dep.state.fl.us/AGO/AGOImages/OpenDataSite/FDEP%20Data%20Disclaimer.pdf.

Thanks,
Jacob Doty
Help Desk/Training Lead
OTIS Enterprise GIS
(850) 245-7650"

The linked page doesn't mention copyrights. However, the email says the data is provided as "public service". http://www.psc.state.fl.us/ says " Subject to certain statutory exceptions, most documents and records maintained by the Commission and the State of Florida, including but not limited to electronic data, are public records under Florida law." And public records -> Public domain, see Wikipedia. I couldn't find any exceptions for the landuse data.

About used tags:
"Are you sure that Electrical Power Transmission Lines never have scrub
growing beneath them?"
"2610: Fallow Cropland"
I will now check if it is scrub or grassland. (or farmland)

"Oil, Water or Gas Long Distance Transmission Lines  natural=grassland
I would expect also farmland"
Oil, Water, or.... is only used for clear cuttings in forests. If the pipeline goes under farmland (or anything else than wooded areas), it is tagged as farmland or whatever. For an example, see https://i.imgur.com/QOG2elm.png Same as the "Electrical Power Transmission Lines"-areas. However, there is the same grassland<>scrub problem, so i will check manually.

"Timber Processing  landuse=industrial industrial=sawmill
always sawmills? Excluding storage/seasoning sites?"
Only saw sawmills for now, but since this is very rarely used, manual checking isn't a problem.

"1220 and 1320 seem more like residential=trailer_park than residential=urban
1210 and 1310 seem more like residential=single_family than
residential=urban
1454 seems more like tourism=caravan_site than landuse=residential"
"1750 seems more like landuse=civic_admin than landuse=commercial"
Sounds good, thanks!

"A lot of the categories with landuse=industrial sound like they could be
more specific, like industrial=oil with 1540, industrial=depot (or
landuse=depot) with 8130, or industrial=shipyard (and
landuse=industrial) with 1551."
Not really. 1540 can be oil or gas, 8130 describes usually large(r) warehouses, but not only. 1551 are small businesses, the property is usually not larger than a McDonalds. I don't know why there's an seperate category for these, as they don't differ from "1400: Commercial and Services". But ok.

"2400 seems like it's conflating landuse=vineyard and landuse=plant_nursey"
"7410 sounds too broad to use with natural=scrub. from viewing, it seems
just as likely to be a plains, forest, or brownfield"
Will check manually.

"I don't see anything that gets mapped as landuse=retail, which makes me
suspicious. What OSM calls "retail landuse" is often called "commercial"
zoning in the US, and what OSM calls "commercial landuse" is often
called "industrial parks" in the US. Be careful that you're not making
that mistake."
So far, everything looked good here. Retail sites are tagged as commercial, but this isn't a big problem in my opinion, since i view lu=retail as an more detailed description of a commercial area, just as wetland=marsh is a more detailed description of natural=wetland.

"It might be good to include a tag with the original code, to provide
more detail and allow for later corrections. However, I don't think
note=* is a good place for it, rather it should go in an import-specific
tag. Something like fdep:level3, or fdep:landuse_code maybe?"
fdep:landuse_code sounds good.

"Custom validator rules with autoreplace may be a better idea.
Depending on format: maybe some automated script?
If you are unfamiliar with programming I would recommend at least asking
(on Slack/Discord/IRC) after resolving all other issues
it should be relatively easy to implement it - there is chance that someone
has something easily adaptable or can write one."
Nah, thats too complex. If i change the tags manually, i can get a broader look at the data and see if something has changed due to recent construction.

"and when you get into urban areas especially, my gut feeling is just don't do it."
The data quality and it's potential is too good to "just don't do it". I will take more detailed looks at city centres/areas around them and look for problems. I mean, from what i've seen, the data is not 100% correct, but 99%. And thats a veery good value for landuse data, especially if you compare it against existing landuses. (Don't want to offend landuse mappers)

Greetings