[Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Mon Mar 13 23:35:01 UTC 2017

On 14-Mar-17 04:53 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> On 13.03.2017 16:57, Andy Townsend wrote:
>> I'm a native English British English speaker, and to me brownfield does
>> not mean just "scheduled for development".  It just means "was used for
>> some development but is no longer".  It _may_ then be used for something
>> else in the future (you often hear "redevelopment of brownfield sites),
>> but that's not a requirement.
>> It'd be perfectly meaningful to say "in XYZ place there are lots of
>> brownfield sites not scheduled for any development".
> Fine, so maybe we losen the Wiki definition a bit, saying that the 
> land _might_ be scheduled for future development. That leaves the 
> focus on the fact that the land had been used before.

Might is rather too pessimistic for me to place that in OSM. I would 
prefer 'probable', both terms are subjective .. so some will object.
So I would have
the land _probably_  will be developed.
> On 13.03.2017 15:55, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> > "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for 
> something.
> > Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.
> Yes that is a form of troll tagging, negating the key. Thus I'd prefer 
> brownfield as above.

I think it says what it was used for .. a disused church is still a church.
The question should be ... is it still recognisable for what it was?

More information about the Tagging mailing list