[OSM-talk] Several approved features moved to Map_features page

[Mike Collinson]

At 02:13 AM 26/02/2007, Tom Chance wrote:
>Here's a modification of your earlier proposal:
>
>surface  = what the surface is, e.g. grass, woodland, forest...
>access   = who can go on the land, e.g. public, private, common, permissive...
>landuse  = what the land is used for, e.g. retail, allotments, livestock...
>tourism  = tourist facilities, e.g. information, camp_site, theme_park...
>leisure  = leisure facilities, e.g. playground, sports centre, cinema...
>amenity  = other local facilities, e.g. parking, school, courthouse...
>
>Then you have shop, sport and military as rather obvious tags that should
>hardly require explanation. By the way, "amenity" could cover anything said
>to be of tangible value to the area, but then it would be overly broad, so
>I've defined it as the stuff that's left over, the current remaining values
>seem somehow similar anyway.
>
>I'm still stumped on where to put the village green, I'm tempted to say it
>should go in as a landuse, and allow for multiple values separated with a
>semicolon (e.g. "landuse=livestock;village_green").

Pedantically, an argument could be made that is an access= type? From 
a modern perspective, is it not a leisure facility?  The latter would 
be more intuitive as we already have a sister, leisure=park.

Mike
Manila