[Tagging] Updating definition and description of place=square

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Sun Mar 22 20:20:31 UTC 2020

On Sun, 22 Mar 2020 at 19:56, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>

> > On 22. Mar 2020, at 20:46, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > So you say it's purely about the name.  Then, later in your response,
> contradict
> > yourself.
> let me put it like this: it’s a very strong indication.

I disagree.  There's a housing development a few miles from me.  It's in
what used to be a field belonging to the vicarage just north of it.  The
field was called "Maes Rheithordy" which is Welsh for "Vicarage Field."
The housing development is called "Maes Rheithordy" (that is the
street name in the addresses).  Should I map it as residential land
use with houses on it or should I map it as a field because of the "Maes"
in the name?

In my town there are housing estates Maesglas, Maesycoed and
Maes-y-Dderwen, all named after the fields that used to be there.
And North Park, which is a housing estate not a park.

Name alone is not a good indicator of usage or how something should be
mapped.  At best it's a clue as to what might be there now.  A blanket
rule that anything with "Square" in the name must be mapped as
place=square is as defective as one saying that anything with
"Maes" in the name must be mapped as a field.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200322/789f408a/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list