[Tagging] Updating definition and description of place=square
gdt at lexort.com
Mon Mar 23 22:03:53 UTC 2020
Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> writes:
> Am Mo., 23. März 2020 um 18:47 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel <gdt at lexort.com>:
>> We need it for en_US, too, because in the US, at least in New England,
>> everybody knows what Square means and it is different from what this
>> thread is discussing.
> Think about pre-60ies urbanism. And "new urbanism", for example.
Sorry, too confusing!
> Here are some examples in New England (I do not know them from visiting,
> but they are obvious from looking at the map):
not tagged as place=square. not in New England! (seriously, New York
is not part of New England)
Yes, uses Square in name and fits the eurodef.
does not use sqaure in the name and is not place=square.
Not clear if it really functions as a eurodef-square.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/474864229 Union Square
wrong link, but guessing you mean
https://osm.org/go/Zct8XcGSc--?layers=N then that seems like maybe it
fits and is named.
> Also this could be a square:
could be, but it could also just be a bit of grass.
> (sorry no time for more examples now)
That's fine, but the point is not that we have zero things in the US
that meet the Euro definition of square. It is that we have many things
that have square in the name that do not, and therefore that inhabitants
of the US, or at least New England, do not relate at all to the EURO
definition of square.
Here is the most well known thing named square in New England (six
and note the green area to the NE is not part of Harvard Square - it is
"Harvard Yard", which is a thing near Harvard Square.
Here's another example of someting with Square in the name that is not a
More information about the Tagging