[Tagging] multiple schools on one plot

stevea steveaOSM at softworkers.com
Sun Apr 4 10:17:39 UTC 2021


My USA perspective (and working on wiki-documenting the gradations of admin_level for many years here, even in states where I’m not familiar with the levels of governments, but others who are actively have participated in good wiki discussion and subsequent tagging because of it, especially at the more-difficult as-they-get-more-local values of 7 - 10) now offers this list some of my insights for place=neighbourhood.  This tag works well for on both nodes and polygons which might also be tagged admin_level=10, but the latter tag should be applied only if there is a recognized “administration” (of government) on / at that neighborhood (USA spelling, but we use the one with the ‘u’ in it in the tag value).

Some (most?) states in the USA also have “homeowner organizations” which are a way that a tract of land might get divided into separate and individual (taxable, cadastral) parcels, have a house built upon each one, and then get sold off (sometimes slowly) with the new owners becoming a quasi- or perhaps actual kind of government (with covenants, rules, dues paying members with representation, meetings with rules of governance…).  Whether these get tagged admin_level=10 is contentious (and quite rare) but some in OSM believe it should be done, especially in larger USA cities which have distinct “sub-city” such “neighborhood councils” that are clearly a (very) local form of government.  My opinion is that boundary=HOA (or homeowner_association) should suffice for homeowner associations, but this remains a new and untested concept.  True neighborhoods, in larger cities (admin_level=8) with a council and a budget to fix local streetlights, for example, OK, those can get admin_level=10.

A much more common and acceptable “norm” which has evolved (rather than use place=neighborhood OR applying an admin_level=10 tag to a residential polygon) is to simply add a name=* tag with a value of what the “area” is called directly to the same polygon which is also tagged landuse=residential.  There are subtle differences between all of these approaches, which do still seem to continue to cause some discussion and even infrequent friction, but these are getting worked out in a sort of slow-motion consensus (at least around me, in California, and possibly more widely in the USA).

While I can entertain a possible “smaller than neighbourhood” value for the place key (but not quite “locality,” which is unpopulated), this would require a fair bit of discussion to coin the right word.  I don’t encounter such a small gradation in my world, but it might exist elsewhere; “neighborhood” is about as small an agglomeration as I’m familiar with (with the exception of “apartment building” or “single house” which we map otherwise, or even “clan, family…” which I don’t think we wish to map at all).  However, some countries extend admin_level values past 10 (to 11), so sometimes extra flexibility is needed.

SteveA


> On Apr 4, 2021, at 12:01 AM, Jeroen Hoek <mail at jeroenhoek.nl> wrote:
> 
>> I am aware that it is rarely done (5% of all landuses have a name tag), but 
>> my suggestion is to deprecate this. 
> 
> If you wish to separate naming of areas from landuse, you will need to
> introduce a new place-tag for such features which often lie below the
> size of place=neighbourhood and don't fit in the description of
> place=locality. You have my support if you go that route, but 'name' is
> currently one attribute that landuse=* has no alternative for.
> 
> And of course the percentage of landuse=* areas with a name is low
> between all the nameless ones. It is still used over 1,5 million times.
> 
>> I am aware that it is rarely done (5% of all landuses have a name 
>> tag), but my suggestion is to deprecate this. It makes it impossible
>> to add more detailed landuse, as this would exclude these areas from
>> the „housing project“/named area.
>> 
>> landuse should be about the usage of land, not imply other concepts 
>> like housing projects.
> 
> It doesn't in these cases. Only the name of that piece of residential area.
> 
>>> as can landuse=retail for shopping centres.
>> 
>> 
>> the tag for shopping-centers is shop=mall landuse=retail is for land
>> primarily used for retail, and can contain> any number of malls and 
>> shops, just like several landuse=retail could together describe a
>> single mall.
> 
> Which is documented as applying to the outline of buildings (or as a
> node), not on an area containing several stores (and their parking lot)
> that are collectively named something.
> 
> As long as it is just a name being stuck to whatever the landuse
> represents, this is fine in lieu of something more specific. Names
> matter to people.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




More information about the Tagging mailing list