[OSM-talk] Fwd: [Tagging] Tagging the local language
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Sat Jan 11 23:07:21 UTC 2020
> a change in the urban structure (urban confuguration, architectural style, living standards, socially / ownerstructure, etc.). can mark a border very strongly in some instances
Right, that's why we can map landuse=residential, landuse=industrial,
landuse=commercial and landuse=retail as areas with clear boundaries.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On 1/12/20, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> Am Sa., 11. Jan. 2020 um 01:30 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com>:
>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 2:49 AM Mateusz Konieczny
>> <matkoniecz at tutanota.com>
>>> or to use tricks like the “place=neighbourhood” one (which is based on
>>> POIs rather than polygons)?
>>> It is certainly wrong to do this.
>> I think the “trick” here is referring to the stand at practice of mapping
>> all place= features as nodes, including neighborhoods, because their
>> boundaries are usually fuzzy (and precise boundaries can be mapped with
>> boundary=administrative or another boundary= tag).
> mostly I agree, although it should be mentioned that neighbourhood (or
> other place boundaries like quarter and suburb) may be very clear although
> they aren't officially declared: when they are hard "natural" borders like
> railroads, rivers, motorways, etc. Also a change in the urban structure
> (urban confuguration, architectural style, living standards, socially /
> ownerstructure, etc.). can mark a border very strongly in some instances,
> without it having to be an administrative boundary.
More information about the talk