[Tagging] Urban perimeter

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue May 27 14:18:16 UTC 2014

2014-05-27 15:37 GMT+02:00 Fernando Trebien <fernando.trebien at gmail.com>:

> I like Nelson's idea of using a new value for "boundary" to represent
> this, mainly because the perimeter is not "ground truth" but an
> invisible "legal definition" that roughly matches the urbanized area.

IMHO the extension of a settlement is ground truth and can be surveyed or
gotten from aerial imagery. The legal boundary traffic-wise isn't a
boundary actually, rather it is a lot of points (city limit signs) that
locally define the boundary for that piece of road. As this is not needed
for anything but traffic rules it would make more sense to map it to where
it belongs (the individual roads). At least around here there is no such
thing as a perimeter for inside / outside the settlement under traffic
aspects, there are only points (and those are sometimes moved inward or
outward the actual built-up area, just as it seems appropriate under
traffic aspects).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140527/895f055a/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list