[Tagging] tagging the multipolygon model (was landuse and military)

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Sat Oct 17 09:51:31 BST 2009


2009/10/16 Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Ben Laenen <benlaenen at gmail.com> wrote:
>> It obviously failed at that completely. The most used tags
>> (landuse=residential, industrial, farm, commercial, military, retail...) don't
>> give any detail about ground cover. It has become so bad that I don't see a
>> way to even try to fix this with the landuse tag. It has to go back to the
>> drawing board without thinking about tags that are in use today.
>>
>> Ben
>
> It doesn't fail so much because most of the time, landuse values are
> exclusive (residential, industrial, forest, etc).

"most of the time" is not a good enough point.

> It is already enough
> complicated to add polygones or multipolygones for landuse. We can see
> that this is only done in countrysides or small urban areas but not in
> towns/cities.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.4749&lon=13.4858&zoom=14&layers=B000FTF

just because most of the areas had different focus in the past
(roads), doesn't mean we won't get there...

> We cannot ask people to create a second polygon which
> will most of the time be a copy of the landuse : "land covered by
> buildings used for residential" or "land covered by trees used for
> trees farm".

yes we can. And if it is a copy of landuse I wouldn't recommend to
make it - obviously just in cases where it is different.

> I think we should better enforce landuse to be exclusive
> by removing the non-exclusive values like military.

no, there isn't exclusive landuses in the way we were tagging. In
which way military is different from farm, landfill, quarry,
greenfield ? It is possible to have a quarry that became landfill and
now is covered by forest.

cheers,
Martin




More information about the Tagging mailing list