[Tagging] "landuse=residential" in rural areas

David Fisher djfisher81 at gmail.com
Fri Aug 17 11:52:31 BST 2012


Hi all,

I'm currently entering some survey data from my summer holiday (in rural
England).  Living in a city, tagging "landuse=residential" is
straightfoward; but in the countryside houses often have large grounds
attached to them, and even fields.  In particular there are quite a few
rows of houses following a highway, which have enormous
gardens/grounds/fields behind them.  I can see the logic of
"abutters=residential" for this, but I understand that this has been
deprecated.

So how should "landuse=residential" be applied in these circumstances?
Intuitively I'd like to just use it around the immediate environs of the
houses (to include e.g. any kitchen-garden, garage, outbuildings etc),
since tagging the whole lot (grounds and all) as landuse=residential would
(to me) imply a large built-up area which does not actually exist.  But I
realise I'm running the risk of "tagging-for-the-renderer" accusations here
;-)

I've read this previous thread [1] and the associated wiki page, but it
seems to be concerned with urban areas and small plots of land, whereas I'm
talking about much larger areas in rural settings.  Maybe this doesn't
matter, though... what do people think?

Thanks in advance,

David (user Pgd81).

[1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2011-May/007700.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20120817/ca904b03/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list