[Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Jan 17 14:44:02 GMT 2012

2012/1/17 Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com>:
> Apart from the aspect of overcrowding any map produced from this data,

what do you mean? In lower zoom levels it looks exactly the same:

and in closeups you get the detail that otherwise would simply be missing:

> it is
> simply not helpful from a practical point of view. What additional
> information do I gain from excluding the road from the landuse area, it is
> anyway clear that people do not live on roads.

you get the border between public and private land. Why is that not
helpful or interesting?

> Let me use other landuse examples: military. There it is more obvious that
> the roads in the military area are used for military purposes.

If the roads are part of the area I agree. This is the difference. A
residential road is not part of the lots along it, a military landuse
on the other hand has the roads as part of the area. A public road
dividing a military area would not be included in the
landuse=military, even if it is used by the military.

> Or look at the industrial landuse - would you exclude the service roads and
> any similar roads not dedicated to through-traffic?

I would include roads inside an industrial complex (inside private
property) in the landuse, and would exclude the public roads.


More information about the Tagging mailing list