[OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

[Lionel Giard]

I understand your point, and that's why we should say if something must be
done or not : describing the best practices.
For landuse inside an existing residential area, it is always possible to
just change the residential zone into a multipolygon relation and make the
new landuse (like the park) an inner polygon. So it will still display the
same on the map, but will not count as having two landuse at the same
place. It avoids to tediously redraw a large residential area.

But for the roads, ideally, it should ideally be an area (like on the GRB
of Vlaandereen or the PICC of Wallonia) with also the existing line to
allow routing. I don't know, if we must change existing residential area
when adding area for the road, because it will probably look good on the
map, but maybe it would be a problem for people using the data ?! At least
it shouldn't be a problem for the big highways, because they often don't
have landuse at the moment (look at http://osmlanduse.org/ ).

About the area you linked, I really don't have a definitive answer, is the
wooded area part of the garden of the houses ? Maybe do a mix of
landuse=residential and landuse=forest/lancover=trees (to have the house
and garden not included in the forest) ?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20170428/cdfcc032/attachment.htm>