[Tagging] [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Oct 13 11:59:39 BST 2009

2009/10/13 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>:
>> This does not sound completely strange, but still incorporates some
>> problems (all currently tagged landuse=military will get deprecated).
>> I don't see the big problem here, as you can
>> 1. draw a landuse=military around the whole area (and probably
>> military=barracks)
>> 2. draw a landuse=forest around the actual forest
>> 3. draw a landuse=school around the actual school (or building=school
>> for the school-building)
>> 4. draw and tag the parking_lot where it is.
>> IMHO landuse=military is already what you want to express with
>> boundary=military. The boundary-object can be tagged as
>> barrier=fence/wall/whatever with entrances, gates, videosurveillance
>> etc.
> What about using a relation to add secondary land uses?

why? If the landuse is inside another landuse, and not excluded by
multipolygon, why use a relation (it is more complicated and breaks
easier). What would be the benefit? There is a proposal to do so
anyway (site-relation).


More information about the Tagging mailing list