[Tagging] other landuse values?
vpottier at gmail.com
Sun Aug 15 18:23:52 BST 2010
On 15/08/2010 18:54, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> didn't you use a subtag for continuous/discontinuous? Could have been helpful.
We have put the CLC:code tag in all polygons imported, so it is easy to
find them back.
But no sub tag.
For the polygons are often been modifyed from import, we can't put a bot
to ass a subtag.
And the polygons would be adjusted to fit the current discussion.
But Osmose would help to find polygons with a landuse=residential +
>> But perhaps we could have something more accurate for city centers that
>> would be near Continuous urban.
> IMHO not all continuous urban fabrics are centres, or I don't get the
> meaning of this term according to my unsufficient English.
You are right ! They are, also in Besançon, 'centers' in suburbs.
>> Why not a landuse=city_centre (according to the English spelling) if it fits
>> many situation throughout the world ?
> If you like a taq like this, you could just as well use
> which avoids "city" because centres occur in villages and other
> settlements as well.
I didn't know this proposal.
> Still I think that an attribute to assign additionally to the landuse
> would be a better approach than using an exclusive landuse term for
> If we can find some consensus here how to tag centres I would change
> the proposal to fit.
> What do you think about centre_type (quoting from the proposal):
> centre_type=sub_centre - use this for local centres, that are not
> considered main centre of the whole city/town/village. Probably exists
> only in bigger cities.
> centre_type=main_centre - use this for the main centre, in big cities
> there could be several main centres, while in villages and smaller
> cities I wouldn't expect more than one main centre
Interesting proposal. I will talk about it on the French ML to see how
we can improve the import.
Maybe by the time the "centre_type" list will be enriched.
More information about the Tagging