[Tagging] place=neighbourhood vs landuse=residential

[Justin Tracey]

On 5/7/25 12:30, Evan Carroll wrote:
>     Neighborhoods and residential areas aren't the same thing, and
>     shouldn't
>     be treated as equivalent. E.g., in my city, there is a designated
>     historic neighborhood with a name and explicit boundaries, spanning a
>     few city blocks, and two residential areas with their own names inside
>     it (an apartment complex with two high-rises, and a named stretch of
>     mid-rises).
> 
> 
> Not just is it still the same thing, but I would argue you're doing it 
> wrong if you tag a historic neighborhood as a neighborhood.
> 
> The reason why we have multiple pages dedicated to this https:// 
> wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historic <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/ 
> wiki/Historic> is because something that's historic has a 
> value totally aside from the value of things that are on-the-ground 
> which is the primary guiding concept. If the neighborhood no longer 
> exists in the form described, it's no longer a neighborhood https:// 
> wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Neighbourhood <https:// 
> wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Neighbourhood>
> 
> If anything it _should_ be,
> 
> * historic=neighborhood
> * historic=residential; name=whatever
> 
> And that coexists well with "landuse=residential; name=whatever" today. 
> While retaining the difference (that it no longer functions in that way).
> 

This is North America, the historic neighborhood designation doesn't 
mean the neighborhood no longer exists, it just means the buildings in 
it are older than elsewhere on average. People still refer to it by that 
name, and its borders are contiguous with the surrounding non-historic 
neighborhoods, the historic designation just makes it easier to tell 
where those borders are since there's physical signage.

  - Justin