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

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Thu Sep 1 10:57:15 BST 2011

2011/8/31 Bryce Nesbitt <bryce2 at obviously.com>:
> On 08/31/2011 02:40 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2011/8/31 Bryce Nesbitt <bryce2 at obviously.com>:
> I'm a city dweller. We have some (and will soon have some very prominent)
> rooftop parks.
>> That's fine, you can tag them with leisure=park (or maybe
>> leisure=garden, and garden:type)
> It was a stacking comment.  The renderers seem to implicitly stack buildings
> on top
> of land use, so it won't created the desired results.
> The question is: should it be sufficient to imply that a landuse polygon
> wholly inside of another land use polygon belongs "on top"? Or is it really
> necessary to cut a hole in the outer polygon?

IMHO there is no "landuse" inside another landuse (at least for the
"true" landuses which are the landuses by man. If we use
landuse=forest to indicate trees they might also be stacked). A
rooftop park IMHO is not about landuse but is a part of the building.
Landuse is about the use of _land_ (and therefore is at ground level).
You should not cut a hole in the outer polygon because if the garden
on top of the building influences the landuse it will influence it for
the whole plot.


More information about the Tagging mailing list