[Talk-GB] walls versus landuse=field

Henry Gomersall heng at cantab.net
Tue Apr 30 08:38:14 UTC 2013


One of my little hopes (which I'm very very slowly attacking) is to have
OSM have all the walls and fences and suchlike to the same standard as
OS (them being very useful to walkers and suchlike).

I noticed that lots of fields, for example in
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.92332&lon=-1.7091&zoom=15&layers=M
are shown as closed loops of landuse=field. Clearly walls/fences and
enclosed fields are somewhat equivalent, but subtly different in terms
of what they describe (certainly, walls are not always around fields)

Am I the only one that has been drawing walls and not fields? It's nice
to have fields as individual logical units, but they're defined by the
walls, so it strikes me the wall should be the defining characteristic.
Is this a software problem in that the areas and the features are
defined independently?

Fields do at least render, but this seems like a poor reason to me.

cheers,
Henry




More information about the Talk-GB mailing list