[OSM-talk] Not attaching polygons to roads

Shaun McDonald shaun at shaunmcdonald.me.uk
Fri Feb 21 00:09:05 UTC 2014

It would be so much simpler if people would just map the area of the road as landuse=highway, in as similar fashion to landuse=railway.


On 20 Feb 2014, at 22:40, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> On 20.02.2014 23:04, Dave F. wrote:
>> There's a general consensus that attaching polygons to ways that
>> represent roads was a bad idea.
> Not really.
> There is not a consensus but a ceasefire. Everyone is free to map this
> as they like, and to change it if there's a need - e.g. someone else has
> connected the field to the road, now you want to map the fence, so you
> need to split it apart. That's ok. Similarly, someone re-doing the whole
> area from better imagery or whatever has every right to map as he
> pleases - if they thing they can be more efficient by joining
> boundaries, more power to them.
> What is *not* ok is one person "cleaning up" after the other without
> actually adding any other improvement.
> I.e. if the other guy has connected the fields and the roads and you
> have been *only* pulling them apart without contributing anything else
> to the area in question, then you should have let them be; on the other
> hand, if the other guy has merged fields and roads that previously were
> separate, then they shouldn't have done that.
> This whole question is essentially a matter of taste, and you are
> allowed to map according to your taste, and discouraged from enforcing
> your taste for others.
> Bye
> Frederik
> -- 
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

More information about the talk mailing list