[OSM-talk] Proper use of landuse=residential ?

[Michael Collinson]

At 11:21 AM 10/17/2007, David Earl wrote:
>On 17/10/2007 10:16, Alex S. wrote:
> > Michael Collinson wrote:
> >> abutters=* .. chief drawback from a data entry POV is when you get
> >> a street with houses on one side and industrial buildings or some
> >> such on the other.
> >
> > On the block where I live, there are a grand total of two residential
> > buildings - I'm completely surrounded by office, retail and service
> > spaces.  So, it would certainly break down here.
>
>Yes, it would, if you regard it as being a perfect representation of the
>street. However, if it is *predominantly* one use or another, it does
>give a feel of the area.

Yes agreed.  I've been a bit anal there, not wanting to show houses 
where there is a nice park or not so nice power station on one side.

>I did wonder when I first started if 'urban' was a better description
>than 'residential', with more specific industrial commercial etc as
>appropriate. Hence my reference to 'urban envelope' in the last message.

I think that would make a good practical addition.  landuse=urban or 
envelope=urban can be roughed from Landsat or Yahoo imagery where you 
are not quite sure what all those buildings are and then 
landuse=residential, etc overlaid progressively with local 
knowledge/ground survey.

Mike
Stockholm