[Tagging] Residential gardens: deprecate leisure=garden, suggest alternative

Vincent Pottier vpottier at gmail.com
Tue May 24 10:57:11 BST 2011

Le 24/05/2011 10:39, Andrew Chadwick (lists) a écrit :
> On 24/05/11 00:49, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> [...] the landuse values describing built-up space should usually not be
>> split below plot size.
> I'll read that as another vote against small landuse plots, but again:
> there's nothing in the wiki explaining this fact, and in fact landuse is
> regularly used for plot-sized areas of land.
>> leisure=garden inside a landuse=residential area could be used for a
>> private garden, maybe together with access=private. You can also use
>> garden:type=residential with it:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Garden_specification
> -1, Residential private gardens are not for general user's leisure
> activities, and therefore no not belong in the leisure=* key. See my
> original post.
> I'm easy about whether I recommend
>    landuse=residential
>    residential=garden
> or just
>    residential=garden
> within a landuse=residential polygon, or even
>    garden=residential
> on its own within a landuse=residential polygon (sort of like the
> stalled proposal's wrongheaded :type key, but allowing the user to
> decide whether general leisure purposes fit as well. A leisure=garden
> would be strictly optional, and we should document the meaning of adding
> that).
> Which do people prefer
I'd rather use the residential=garden as it may start a set of values to 
describe sub-polygons in a landuse residential.
here http://osm.org/go/0CUOvbQ1-- is a suburb I would improve, there are 
grass areas, parkings between buildings.
The fact of having a main landuse=residential ans sub residential=* 
(and, why not, residential=parking that is not a public parking, and in 
the same way we could have a industrial=parking that is only for the 
workers of the company or for visitors) would permit this improvement.

More information about the Tagging mailing list