[OSM-talk] [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

Thomas Davie tom.davie at gmail.com
Tue Jan 17 16:33:31 GMT 2012


On 17 Jan 2012, at 13:37, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> 2012/1/17 Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>:
>> On 1/17/2012 8:10 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote:
>> I'm not suggesting either of these. But a single chunk of houses is clearly
>> all residential, whether it's the size of a few lots or a huge subdivision.
> 
> 
> +1. public streets are not part of it. Have a look how others deal
> with this at a scale of 1:2000 (zoom 18).

Aren't they?

Why then do we tag them as "residential" roads then?  Could it be because they're part of the residential area?

>> Splitting it at roads gives no benefit and complicates editing greatly. This
>> is just ridiculous:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=35.323225&lon=-119.077089&zoom=18
> 
> 
> how does that complicate anything? Connecting roads to landuses and
> other areas complicates editing greatly. A mapping like the above
> eases editing and is more precise then a huge landuse-polygon. I don't
> find anything ridiculous in this.

It complicates things greatly because you have to draw a much more complex polygon that goes around every single road on the map.  Worse, editing that road then becomes a case of editing the landuse areas around it too to make them follow the new road.


Ultimately though, this gets back to the same old problem that we have a disparity between how we tag roads and how we tag everything else.  For pretty much everything we make an area, and label what it is, for roads, we make a single way.

In my book, until we're making areas for roads (and possibly even then), the residential area extends all the way across the road.

Bob


More information about the talk mailing list