[OSM-talk] Map Features List

[Mike Collinson]

At 06:46 PM 11/12/2007, Chris Hill wrote:

>> From: Andy Robinson (blackadder) <blackadderajr at googlemail.com>
>> >
>> >I read it as abutters is replaced by landuse, since all of the abutter
>> >types are matched by landuse and with more options too.
>> >Cheers
>> >Chris
>> >
>> 
>> No, please don't delete the abutters tag from Map Features.
>> The
>> 
> Abutters tag
>> applies to ways and is separate to any landuse tagging. The
>> abutters
>> 
> tag is
>> still widely used, including by me.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Andy
>
>OK I'll leave them alone - that's why I asked.
>
>I'm keen to see why abutters is useful:
>How do you know which side of a way it applies to?  

That (to me) is the one drawback, however as someone (David ?) previously pointed out, it refers to "predominant" use and you can do things like mark a street as abutters=residential and then draw a park as an area.

>How do you know the extent of the type beyond the way?
>Does it get rendered?

It used to.  I mapped the entire central Sydney using it since zoning is done on a pretty much street by street basis.  It produced a really great visual map even without each and every road annotated.  You could see the central shopping areas, surrounded by a zone of mixed usage merging into residential neighbourhoods as you move into the suburbs and industrial zones to the south.  All pre-Yahoo imagery.

>Is it intended for some non-rendering purpose?

David Earl has answered this one.  I would add that it is a great tool when a) you don't any area well enough to sketch landuse as areas and/or you don't have aerial imagery available.


Me, I'd like it left alone, including the mixed attribute (why remove it?) and re-introduce it to rendering.

Mike 
Stockholm