[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=highway
gdt at ir.bbn.com
Sat Nov 30 01:22:26 UTC 2013
cracklinrain <cra_klinrain at gmx.de> writes:
> German roads are built similar. But usually this is not dependent on
> stuff like property. Usually land owners are forced to fit onto the
> local prescriptions. So maybe a ditch is part of the property of a
> private person, but part of the street. Barriers are already part of the
It seems that if the rule is "the road authority can control what
happens" that's an alternate functional definition of property ownership :-)
> I would welcome landuse=highway from the view that there are tons of
> mappers at Germany who map landuse-areas onto road-nodes - which is
> totally unacceptable for me.
> On the other hand I am against a landuse=road, because it will encourage
> mappers to map highway=track surrounded by an area of landuse=road,
> instead of mapping rivers and streams in the close neighbourhood.
In the US (at least Massachusetts), this sounds almost always wrong,
because there is a strong notion of a legal road vs someplace you may
physically drive. A legal road might be dirt, and it will still be
highway=unclassified surface=dirt or some such. A service road
(driveway) or track (typically agricultural/etc.) will not have an
associated segment of land, because it's just a physical feature of a
larger parcel, rather than something that has a parcel for it.
So I think it's fine to use landuse=highway for areas of land which are
defined to encompass legal roads, but not to assume such areas surround
Which means I oppose landuse=road for the same reasons you do: redundant
and encouraging wrong mapping.
All that said, I wouldn't (myself) add landuse=highway for most local
roads, because it doesn't seem that useful compared to what else I could
do. But for large-scale highways, I can see doing that. That said, it
doesn't feel wrong and I can't object if that's what someone else is
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Tagging