[Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

Joseph Eisenberg joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Thu Sep 20 04:04:16 UTC 2018


Would you be willing to revive the proposal and get it voted?

Once it is approved we can make a real wiki page for landuse=civic_admin
and ask JOSM / ID folks about including it in presets.

I agree that it is needed


On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:59 AM John Willis <johnw at mac.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sep 20, 2018, at 9:40 AM, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> It’s not necessary to have a separate landuse area if the government
> office is in a single building or shop. In that case  the overarching
> “landuse” is still retail or commercial.
>
>
> Do they sell "legislation" at a town hall? Does the DMV "conduct
> commerce"? Nope. Retail is always wrong. Commercial is a crutch.
>
> As for not needing an area polygon, I disagree. People mapping in a
> detailed way will want a point, a building, and an area. There are areas
> are available for many landuses, but not civic.
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/36.31039/139.35191
>
> Here is a convenience store I mapped. It is surrounded by fields, a
> restaurant, Civic buildings and surge resivoir.
>
> It is a single building on a single landuse, similar to the restaurant,
> the police station, fire station, and rice fields.
>
> Because it is a single use area - it doesn't need an area tag to encompass
> it's parking lots? Fences? Driveways? I think it does.
>
> The same is true with any Civic building.
>
> Even a single shop or a single single city hall building can and
> (eventually) should be mapped with such details, just as we would map
> commercial, industrial, and retail buildings. Point - building - area.
> Maybe the point is merged with the building or the area, but building *and*
> area are necessary in all but the most urban of environments.
>
> This is why I proposed land use=Civic, later revised to
> landuse=civic_admin.
>
> If a town hall or government office is a single building, you could just
> map the building and drop a pin on it.
>
> But if you wanted to map the extent of the land, using commercial or
> retail (imo) is *never* acceptable. It is not for commerce nor selling
> goods. We don't use landuse=retail for a hospital or a park for similar
> reasons.
>
> I wholeheartedly believe the decision to use commercial for Civic
> buildings was wrong, and came from an adversity to making enough new
> landuse values at the start. I want to correct that.
>
> I would like all landuse=Foo and building=foo to be similar, and be
> obvious what to use with new mappers. Industrial buildings are mapped on an
> industrial landuse. Building=Civic is mapped on... Commercial? Ugh.
>
> Landuse=civic_admin not only allows the proper mapping of stand-alone
> offices, but is the *only* way to proper way to map Civic complexes of
> multiple buildings with unique names.
>
> It is useful for both stand-alone buildings or multi-building complexes:
> there are always parking lots, walkways, and other amenities that "belong"
> to the point/building, yet are outside the building's footprint. An area
> polygon is the only way to map them, and landuse=* is the most versitille
> and consistent tag key to do it with.
>
> Javbw.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180920/55bdaf43/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list