[Tagging] Landuse border alignment

[Zeke Farwell]

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 10:29 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:

> IMHO yes, as natural is mainly about landcover (what you physically
> encounter on the spot) while landuse is about usage.
>

If you want do some extremely detailed mapping you might make a lot of
different non-overlapping polygons that represent what's on the ground
"exactly".  However, I don't think that is really necessary or even
"correct".  If there is a large residential area with some chunks of woods
inside it should those chunks of woods not be considered residential land?
 That depends on how much detail you want I suppose, and the answer is
subjective.  I've mapped areas of farmland where the fields have 30 foot
wide strips of woods between them and I just tagged the whole area as
landuse=farm.  Later if someone wants to add the strips of trees in I think
it will be perfectly correct to have overlapping areas of natural=wood.  I
wouldn't consider those strips not a part of the farm just because they are
trees.

Zeke
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20100516/3bfb5685/attachment.html>