[Talk-us] Park Boundary tagging

[Greg Troxel]

stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> writes:

> Each of those seven values for key boundary is documented to be of
> element "area" (with the exception of boundary=user defined, where it
> is given greater freedom to be assigned to primitives of points and
> open polylines).  So for Greg to assert that "if it is a boundary, it
> should be tagging the line feature, and it's a bug for that to affect
> the rendering of the area" just flatly contradicts our wiki.  To
> summarize, the boundary tag absolutely positively defines areas, not
> "line features" (ways as open polylines).  I completely disagree with
> Greg's conclusion above, but I'm still listening to and participating
> in this discussion.

I will concede that my view is contradictory to what's documented.  But
I think there's a fundamental semantic confusion lurking, in that
boundaries are linear features, and properties of land belong as area
features.   But, I see that admin_level=8 boundaries around towns also
let one define which town a particular point is in.  What I am
uncomfortable with is a proliferation of boundary= which is really
trying to set properties of the area.  If boundary=national_park is ok,
why not boundary=shopping_mall, etc.?

(not directed at you in parricular:)

As for landuse=conservation, I agree that it's not well supported in the
wiki.  But I see a principle that every bit of land, more or less
separated by ownership or adminstrative control, should have one landuse
denoting the primary purpose.  For many parcels/etc., 'conservation'
more or less sums up the purpose.   In general, I think we have a
patchwork of tags with confusing semantics.  It's a strength of OSM that
tag usage grows organically without process constraints, but the other
side of the coin is this sort of rethinking and rearranging.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20130302/1bd69cfa/attachment.pgp>