[Tagging] Once more: the village_green - increase in misuse.

[Warin]

On 19/07/19 23:19, Marc Gemis wrote:
> But isn't the main characteristic of a village green / village common
> that is is a rather large, open area ?

Large? No. No requirement for 'large' whatever that may mean.

Open? Yes, in that people/animals can gather together but it could have trees as people/animals can gather under those too.


> I am thinking of a large grass
> field in the centre of the town, but it could probably be paved as
> well (or sand or ...)
> OTOH The use of landcover=greenery is meant for "small" patches of
> bushes / flowers/ trees/ grass that you find in and out of towns.
>
> m.
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 12:38 PM Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think they are at least close to the village, if not within it, in the UK and Australia.
>>
>> On 19/07/19 16:04, Peter Elderson wrote:
>>
>> Hm.. village_common still says village, where often these areas are no longer in a village.
>>
>> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>>
>>
>> Op vr 19 jul. 2019 om 00:42 schreef Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com>:
>>>   As Kevin Kenny says.
>>>
>>> The key 'landuse' is big misused for land covers.
>>>
>>> And this predominately is because of the tag landuse=grass.
>>> While this exists OSM can expect the key 'landuse' to be used (misused) for land covers of all descriptions.
>>>
>>> If the key 'landuse' is only used for the human use of the land - free of any hint of the cover then there may be some hope of resolving 'village_green'.
>>> In Australia there is the 'village common' - land held for common use, this might get away form the 'green' aspect of grass. The rendering colour could also be closer to that of schools and hospitals, again away from the colour green.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19/07/19 07:59, Peter Elderson wrote:
>>>
>>> In Nederland there are many of village_green like areas, used for community events, but without a formal status. I would support tagging these as village_green. Larger cities tend to have several of these areas, often because villages have been incorporated but the central area has retained its function as "village green" in the neighourhood. Let's join the countries that already do this.
>>>
>>> I would also gladly help retagging areas wrongly tagged as village_green. It's used a lot but nothing we couldn't fix in a project, if we agree on a clear convention.
>>>
>>> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>>>
>>>
>>> Op do 18 jul. 2019 om 23:31 schreef Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com>:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:07 AM marc marc <marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> The only way to have a chance to get away with it is to depreciate
>>>>> this tag (at least outside uk but maybe also in uk) in favor of a tag
>>>>> by meaning instead of having a multi-meaning tag
>>>> landuse=grass is horrible, since it describes a landcover rather than
>>>> a land use, but it's plausible for those things that aren't village
>>>> greens.
>>>>
>>>> If you make an exception inside the UK for 'village_green', remember
>>>> that some of us former colonies have them too. Lots of New England
>>>> villages follow the general pattern of villages in Merrie Olde
>>>> England, and (at least historically) have a village hall, a school, a
>>>> church, and shops clustered about a village green or common. (All the
>>>> buildings in modern times may have been repurposed, but the village
>>>> green is likely still there.)
>>>>
>>