[Tagging] landuse=commercial

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Fri Feb 19 10:50:03 UTC 2016

I just noticed that the commercial landuse page has been amended some
months ago, this is the diff:

There are several things I'd like to discuss, because I can't recall they
have been discussed here before this change.

1. the description has changed from "Predominantly offices, business parks,
etc." to "Commercial zone - predominantly offices, business parks, etc."

I strongly reject the introduction of the word "zone" here, as it refers to
"zoning", the act of planning the future landuse (as opposed to the current
landuse of a piece of land), and because it implies a certain scale that is
not inherent to "landuse" as a concept, but is inherent to the actual
landuse planning reality in some countries.

2. several examples have been introduced: "Such area may consists of
offices, administration, laboratories, car repair stations, logisticks
park, etc."

this contains the word "logistics park" which AFAIK is also situated in
landuse=industrial in OSM (warehouses are in industrial according to the
relative tag page),

It also put laboratories and car repair stations into commercial, which
hadn't been clearly in before. In the real world, commercial areas would
also include retail (if I am not mistaken), banks, but in OSM those are a
category of their own, so I wouldn't think that those other usages that are
now introduced to landuse=commercial had simply been "forgotten" in the 6
years before this change to this definition page. This page had stated
"offices, and several offices together in a business park and their
associated infrastructure (car parks, service roads, lawns and so-on)."
This was an exclusive definition in my eyes.

3. Suggestion to add building=commercial
I think it is pretty useless to put building=residential to all buildings
on a residential landuse, or building=industrial to all buildings on an
industrial landuse or building=commercial to all ...
because it doesn't add any detail whatsoever. You can just as well add
building=yes and loose nothing. Instead I'd rather appreciate to add more
detail when looking at the building types, e.g. a commercial building could
be an office building, or it could be an office tower, or ... and a
residential building could be a villa, a detached house, a castle, a cabin,
terraced_house, a townhouse, a tower, .... an industrial building could be
a production hall, a warehouse or whatever. "building=*" is about the
building typology, and typology can be expressed in various levels of
detail, I do not say that "commercial building" is not a kind of building
type, but I say it is such a generalized one, that you don't gain anything
adding it to all buildings on an commercial

What do you think? I propose to revert for the moment, at least partially
I also propose to have a discussion to check our landuse values, e.g. what
about museums, petrol stations, restaurants, laboratories, craft, banks,
libraries, parliaments, schools, universities, churches, ...

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20160219/c1508b79/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list