[Tagging] Landuse border alignment

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/5/16 Zeke Farwell <ezekielf at gmail.com>:
> 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?


I'm not sure whether to consider the wood residential land, after all
that depends on the concrete situation, but I think that this is
exactly what I wrote about: you could simply tag in a first
approximasation the whole area as landuse=residential and at the same
time draw the wood-polygon as landcover=wood (or natural=wood, or
whatever).

cheers,
Martin