[Tagging] residential granularity / was Re: OSM is ... right ...

Tom Pfeifer t.pfeifer at computer.org
Fri Jun 5 12:20:44 UTC 2015

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2015-06-05 13:36:
>> Am 05.06.2015 um 11:33 schrieb David Fisher <djfisher81 at gmail.com>:
>> As for "landuse=residential" -- I agree that we could probably do
>> without it.  But it does add to the readability of the map, especially
>> at low zoom levels, as it enables you to see at a glance where places
>> are and how big they are.
> residential landuse is often seen as "default", it is often used to mark the
 > built up area rather than just the residential areas (especially in villages).
 > We should encourage place polygons for this and restrict the use of residential
 > landuse to residential areas.

+1. Drawing a residential around a village was the early attempt with low-res
aerial images. With the level of detail you get from both 20cm imagery and
open-data property boundaries, my preferred level of granularity is up to a
block, i.e. the landuse surrounded by residential roads (but not glued to them).

This easily allows to draw complementary landuse,
such as retail/commercial/religious/green areas
without the need for multipolygons.

As a first approach when splitting larger landuse, I typically split at
secondary/tertiary roads.


More information about the Tagging mailing list