[Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

AYTOUN RALPH ralph.aytoun at ntlworld.com
Thu May 28 09:22:55 UTC 2015


And with this argument for a hierarchical approach we are back to the start
point of umbrella tags that cover all possibilities which is

landuse=educational as a polygon encompassing the whole area and the whole
range of educational facilities.

using landuse=school excludes universities, colleges, etc  and you would
then need other tags landuse=university and landuse=college, which then
makes the landuse tagging specific instead of general.

If we look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse the first
sentence is correct "Mainly used for describe the *primary use* of land by
humans."
so the hierarchical approach should then be something like
landuse=agriculture... agriculture would then be sub categorised with
farmland (worked land for crops), orchard (trees planted for their fruits),
vineyard, pasture, etc.
landuse=residential (could be divided into urban and rural which have
totally different infrastructures)
landuse=commercial
landuse=industrial
landuse=educational
landuse=civic
landuse=transport
instead of the myriad of specifics that we now have like
landuse=peat_cutting and landuse=salt_pond....these are all sub categories
of the primary use of the land.
I know this has diverted from the main topic here but I wanted to point out
the overall usage to highlight how my suggestion fits into the overall
picture.

On 28 May 2015 at 08:52, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> 2015-05-28 8:28 GMT+02:00 johnw <johnw at mac.com>:
>
>> How about:
>>
>> Forest=natural ?
>>
>>
>> isn’t that natural=wood?
>>
>>
>> or forest=man_made ? [=plantation or somesuch term for a human-planted
>> forest].
>>
>>
>> A forest is a man-altered area, so i believe “forest” already implies
>> man-used. But it is not man_made (as a building is), as the forest is not a
>> non-building structure.
>>
>>
>
> I believe the (not so uncommon amongst OSM mappers) reading of "natural"
> as tag for everything related to nature and man_made for all kind of stuff
> made by mankind is not really helpful. The way these are integrated into
> the tagging scheme is slightly different, they both cover only a subset of
> the aforementioned, namely "natural" covers "natural geographic features"
> like beaches, swamps, bays, peaks, mountain passes, single trees, springs,
> brush, heath, boulders, ... with a few (more recent) exceptions like "mud"
> and "sand" (which actually overlap with other like beach and wetland and
> which are landcovers / materials / surfaces rather than "features"), while
> "man_made" covers technical structures and facilities (like factories,
> chimneys, flagpoles, lighthouses, silos, ...).
>
> Btw.: a forest can or cannot be a man altered area, typically it now is in
> many parts of the world and once wasn't.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150528/bcae8ccb/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list