[Tagging] landuse=residential and named residential areas which belong together (neighbourhoods/subdivisions?)

Stephen Hope slhope at gmail.com
Tue Aug 30 03:25:43 BST 2011


I agree that landuse is not the correct way to do this.  What is the
recommended way?

I've seen landuse used to name sub-divisions, housing estates, a
retirement village, a religious community (not church owned, but where
all the houses were originally sold to members of the same religion).
Basically any named area smaller than a suburb.

Admin_level doesn't seem to work because they are not actually an
administration of any sort, once they're sold to the public. Well, the
retirement village is, but that's an exception.


On 29 August 2011 23:06, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> We have been recently discussing on the German ML about
> landuse=residential. In Germany many mappers were mapping subdivisions
> / neighbourhoods [1] with landuse=residential. This led to very rough
> landuse information, because in order to keep the (sometimes quite
> big) area as a whole they are forced to ignore landuses that don't
> fit.

More information about the Tagging mailing list