[OSM-talk] Residential areas

[David Earl]

Andy said (and Tom made a similar point)...
> As far as I'm concerned, abutters on *ways* is just as bad. The
> landuse adjacent to a way should not be a property of the way; it
> should be marked with a landuse area. See the previous email as
> to why I consider landuse=residential and highway=residential to
> be separate and not imply anything about one another.
>
> However, someone may at some point propose
> pavements=left|right|both, which is about the limit of
> things-that-aren't-streets that I would be happy to see marked as
> a property of the street itself.

In principle I agree, but as I said before, it is too hard so it won't get
done. Simply tagging the street is an easy shorthand. Most people would
recognise what you mean when you say this is a residential street, or a
country lane etc, even though they don't actually mean that. Hard case can
be resolved as you say, but please, let's keep creating the thing as simple
and importantly as quick as possible.

If people insist on creating landuse for everthing, chances are whole
swathes will get tagged residential or nothing will, both equally bad. At
the moment, you have to create the roads, so tagging them is not too
onerous.

*Please* be practical about this.

David