[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Wed Oct 14 10:23:13 BST 2009

2009/10/14 Gilles Corlobé <gilles at corlobe.tk>:
>> Joseph
> In my opinion, the tag "landuse=military" should only be used for specificly
> military activities, like those discribed in the wiki.
> Some of you have suggested to create 2 areas, covering the same place. I
> don't think this is correct. One of you said that's done every day. How can
> it be? There can't be a forest inside a residential area. The residential
> area stops where begins the forest (and the contrary).
> Gilles

might be true for residential and forest (still if it is a small
forest could IMHO be as well inside the residential area), but there
is other examples where e.g. forest or lake or railway-area or sth.
else is inside another landuse, thus being part of it. Think of parks,
a lake in the forest, a forest in a nature reserve, a forest in a
military area, ...

If it is not part of it, it has to be excluded by the use of a


PS: What about continuing this discussion only in tagging-ML?

More information about the talk mailing list