[OSM-talk] Residential areas

[Ben Robbins]

>P.S. do we need tagging at lists.openstreetmap.org to prevent all this  
>kind of stuff drowning out talk, or would that granularise things too  
>much?

Sorry for replying late, but the reason is for the same reason that I agree, 
we need a seperate list for tagging.  I missed the last 3 messages, and only 
just noticed them.  I just asumed this topic has desolved, unresolved, into 
the mailinglist like so many others.

Ideally I would like to be useing a forum rather than a mailing list.  Is it 
known what happened to the osm/levertons forum??

>highway tag also implies you should have  highway=residential_cycleway, 
>highway=residential_footway, etc. etc.)

Well Using the various reasons why the residential tag is different to 
unclassified as a road, not just becasue of its default abutters, I would 
disagree.   Although residential footways do exsist when houses don't sit on 
a road and are accessed by footway.  But thats a different topic.

Even though some poeple don't see the residential and unclassifvied as 
different, I think they should considerer alllowing it to be better defined 
and kept (without default abutters) just because evedently some poeple do 
use it, and can clearly split the two appart.  Like I've said in the past 
you are free not to use it, but if its removed then nobody can use it.  So 
its more fitting for all if it is there and better defined but you can not 
use it if you wish.

Finally, the point about having abutters=none has been drowned out a bit by 
the debate as to weather residential is needed at all.  Would this be an OK 
solution, or should the default abutters rule just be removed from 
osmarender and people deal with the consiquences?

Ben

_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail, News, Sport and Entertainment from MSN on your mobile.  
http://www.msn.txt4content.com/