Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Zoutendijk]

Martin,

> Op 16 jan. 2017, om 11:38 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer  
> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Maybe it could be interesting to see _where_ the usage does not conform to 
> the definition, i.e. from the actual definition, this tag wouldn't have a 
> place outside of the UK (maybe commonwealth) anyway. What about Britain, is 
> the usage there inconsistent as well?

My four examples of “wrong” use, are all from within Britain.
And it seems that outside of Britain the use differs wildly from the definition 
becuase to many people village_green simply means “green spots inside a 
vilage”, and that’s what they use it for.

Marc.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> Op 16 jan. 2017, om 11:38 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer  > het volgende geschreven:
> 
> to be fair, it is not just one user who thinks there is a problem with 
> landuse=grass, it has been noted on various occasions that "grass" is not a 
> use.

I agree with that view and support landcover=* for this use.
But I was referring to the _one_ user who changed the wiki.

Marc.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-01-16 11:26 GMT+01:00 Marc Zoutendijk :

> From other mappers I heard that the wiki should describe what mappers _do_
> map, not what they _should_ map.
>


it should document the consensus. Often the definition of tags is the
result of a proposal and voting. Now if a significant amount of people were
to use the tags nonetheless in a different way with respect to what has
been agreed upon via the proposal process, this can (should) be noted on
the tag definition page, but not necessarily has it to influence the
definition itself (=what the tag should mean), it could be done in a way
that users become aware of the problem without changing the actual
definition (i.e. as a note to the page).



> For landuse=grass there was some debate over the change of the wiki by a
> user, replacing what we do map by what that user thinks we should map.
>


to be fair, it is not just one user who thinks there is a problem with
landuse=grass, it has been noted on various occasions that "grass" is not a
use.



>
> For landuse=village_green the practical use of that tagging is highly
> different (but not everywhere) from what the wiki states.
> Hence I have _added_ a few lines to the wiki, explaining that the use of
> village_green on the map, differs from what’s in the wiki.
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvillage_green
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse
>


+1, IMHO it could be added that this is not desirable nonetheless. Maybe it
could be interesting to see _where_ the usage does not conform to the
definition, i.e. from the actual definition, this tag wouldn't have a place
outside of the UK (maybe commonwealth) anyway. What about Britain, is the
usage there inconsistent as well?

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Zoutendijk]

Earlier I wrote:

> I found many uses of landuse=village_green that _completely_ignore_ the core 
> definition in the wiki!
> I made some screenshotes (from overpass) to inspect (I have used the color 
> red to show the usage):
> 
> https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/PruVaYiH5AgdRQO 
> 
> https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/64YFp8c0jLch6aD 
> 
> https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/YS4ghoklDNdBGSE 
> 
> https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/FFOD0zEB7KMuudL 
> 
> 
> 

> Is that a Village Green according to the wiki?
> Don’t make me laugh!
> 
> What function do the wiki’s have in the OSM world?

From other mappers I heard that the wiki should describe what mappers _do_ map, 
not what they _should_ map.
For landuse=grass there was some debate over the change of the wiki by a user, 
replacing what we do map by what that user thinks we should map.

For landuse=village_green the practical use of that tagging is highly different 
(but not everywhere) from what the wiki states.
Hence I have _added_ a few lines to the wiki, explaining that the use of 
village_green on the map, differs from what’s in the wiki.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvillage_green 

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse 



Marc.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[John Willis]

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Is not the side walk administered by the same people who administer the road?

A hedge is a hedge, regardless if it is planted by the road authorities, the 
walkway along the train station, or the walkway into the mall. In some places 
those are very separate, but in some places those are all mixed together, 
especially when the train station is on a bridge over the road, the mall is on 
the corner, and the road is going over a bridge over a canal - the road, the 
walkways, and the hedges and fences may all be connected on top of a landuse. 

Barrier=hedge doesn't care what land use it is on. 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Warin]

On 13-Jan-17 10:31 AM, John Willis wrote:


Sent from my iPhone


On Jan 12, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chris Hill  wrote:

The green spaces ( and concrete or whatever) around a road are part of the 
infrastructure of a road.

If someone is just mapping a road with a single way, including the sidewalk in 
the way's tags, I agree-

But in cities where the sidewalks are mapped separately as individual ways, the 
green space is often the barrier between the walkway/cycleway and the roads and 
buildings on either side.

We are mapping the electrical cabinets.
Light posts. Electrical poles. Telephone boxes. Signs. Trees. Even curbs. They are not 
the "driving" part of the road.


We don't map these as landuse=light_pole etc.

We map a light pole as a light pole .. the land use is separate.

If the light pole is on an area tagged as a recreation ground .. then that is 
the use to which the light pole is put, lighting the recreation ground.

Grass is a land cover. It could be used to lie on, sit on, play sport .. the 
grass does not determine the use to which it is put.
Landuse=grass is wrong. Simply wrong.

Argument about what an area is used for ... well that will vary from one area 
to another .. and again the local mapper is in the best position to judge that.
But to say it is used by the grass? No.



This inherently means that the "sides" of urban roads do not belong to the 
road. They belong to the sidewalks. The sidewalks may have some relation or route value 
that is shared (I don't know how that goes) - but in many places the route that a 
pedestrian would take is much different than a cyclist or a car (ped stairs, walkways 
over busy intersections, tunnels, etc) - Mapping very difficult and varying sidewalks 
means the chance to map the green barriers as the barriers they are, and the grass that 
is adjacent to them on the building side.


Is not the side walk administered by the same people who administer the road? 
That will vary by location.
In some places at least the road, road verge and side walk are all administered 
by the same authority... the highway people.



This means that, to make the micromapping levels the same, we have to be 
consistent in following the patterns with other tags.



Indeed. landuse=grass is not consistent either. It is just a very bad value.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[John Willis]

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chris Hill  wrote:
> 
> The green spaces ( and concrete or whatever) around a road are part of the 
> infrastructure of a road.

If someone is just mapping a road with a single way, including the sidewalk in 
the way's tags, I agree- 

But in cities where the sidewalks are mapped separately as individual ways, the 
green space is often the barrier between the walkway/cycleway and the roads and 
buildings on either side. 

We are mapping the electrical cabinets. 
Light posts. Electrical poles. Telephone boxes. Signs. Trees. Even curbs. They 
are not the "driving" part of the road. 

This inherently means that the "sides" of urban roads do not belong to the 
road. They belong to the sidewalks. The sidewalks may have some relation or 
route value that is shared (I don't know how that goes) - but in many places 
the route that a pedestrian would take is much different than a cyclist or a 
car (ped stairs, walkways over busy intersections, tunnels, etc) - Mapping very 
difficult and varying sidewalks means the chance to map the green barriers as 
the barriers they are, and the grass that is adjacent to them on the building 
side. 

This means that, to make the micromapping levels the same, we have to be 
consistent in following the patterns with other tags. 



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Gemis]

I'll agree that voting by using a tag is more important than a line on a
wikipage

Op 12 jan. 2017 20:33 schreef "Martin Koppenhoefer" :

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 12 Jan 2017, at 16:47, Marc Zoutendijk 
> wrote:
> >
> > I like that idea too, but why did that proposal process stop? Your
> original proposal is from 2010!! And a renewed one from 2014?
>
>
> the proposal didn't stop, I just didn't bother to bring it to voting, as
> voting is meaningless, it doesn't give the tags more authority. A proposal
> serves to document tags and to open discussion, even if you don't vote. If
> you like a tag, simply use it.
> If a sufficient amount of people use a tag in significant numbers it can
> be seen as de-facto standard, we can probably treat landcover like this.
>
> cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12 Jan 2017, at 16:47, Marc Zoutendijk  wrote:
> 
> I like that idea too, but why did that proposal process stop? Your original 
> proposal is from 2010!! And a renewed one from 2014?


the proposal didn't stop, I just didn't bother to bring it to voting, as voting 
is meaningless, it doesn't give the tags more authority. A proposal serves to 
document tags and to open discussion, even if you don't vote. If you like a 
tag, simply use it.
If a sufficient amount of people use a tag in significant numbers it can be 
seen as de-facto standard, we can probably treat landcover like this.

cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> Op 12 jan. 2017, om 15:17 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer  
> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> 2017-01-11 22:40 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
>> Approach =the problem from 2 different ways of thinking -
> 
>> What is the 'cover' ... landcover ?
>> and then 
>> What is the 'use' ... landuse?
> 
>> Once you divide those 2 things up it makes it clearer what is there. 
>> 
> +1, this is what I am advocating for many years: 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover
> 

I like that idea too, but why did that proposal process stop? Your original 
proposal is from 2010!! And a renewed one from 2014?


To find out how the tag has been used on the map, I started a research with 
overpass in Great Britain to see how that tag is used in that country, being 
the country where the Village Green seems to have originated.

First I quote the wiki:

"A village green is a distinctive part of a village centre. It's an area of 
common land (usually grass but may also be a lake), in the centre of a village 
(quintessentially English - defined separately from 'common land' under the 
Commons Registration Act 1965 and the Commons Act 2006).”

Please note: “distinctive part” and “in the centre of a village” in the 
definition

I found many uses of landuse=village_green that _completely_ignore_ the core 
definition in the wiki!
I made some screenshotes (from overpass) to inspect (I have used the color red 
to show the usage):

https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/PruVaYiH5AgdRQO
https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/64YFp8c0jLch6aD
https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/YS4ghoklDNdBGSE
https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/FFOD0zEB7KMuudL

Especially the 3rd example is worth 
viewing.https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/FFOD0zEB7KMuudL
To see what’s really there (‘on the ground”), you should drive around a bit:

https://www.google.nl/maps/@52.0368116,-0.7484204,3a,90y,285.92h,79.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm8DAnw2KC8KgIml_rvBz-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=nl

Is that a Village Green according to the wiki?
Don’t make me laugh!

What function do the wiki’s have in the OSM world?


Marc.




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-01-11 22:40 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

> And I disagree with all of them being leisure=garden.
> The green patches between a road and a footway are not 'leisure' things ..
> they are 'safety' things .. particularly beside busy roads.
>


I believe you are making this too "philosophical". Should we tag the
private residential garden of someone who doesn't use it in his leisure
time differently from the garden of someone who uses it?
Green patches along a road can be there for decorative reasons and or for
safety reasons, one doesn't exclude the other. There are areas around the
world where people do sit down aside a road, e.g. there are flower beds,
benches, etc.

This said, I don't think we should tag the green areas along roads as
gardens, unless there is a particular exception (garden themed areas).



>
> If these same areas were covered with concrete .. would you still think of
> them as 'leisure'? In other words .. are you associating the 'cover' with
> the 'use' of these areas?
>


there is also a connection between cover and use, but in the first place
concrete areas are unlikely "these same areas" as the grass areas with just
a different cover. The only common property is the position along the road.




> Approach =the problem from 2 different ways of thinking -
>
> What is the 'cover' ... landcover ?
>
> and then
>
> What is the 'use' ... landuse?
>
> Once you divide those 2 things up it makes it clearer what is there.
>


+1, this is what I am advocating for many years:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Chris Hill]

The green spaces ( and concrete or whatever) around a road are part of 
the infrastructure of a road. If the road wasn't there the land would 
have another use, such as farmland. So I believe this should be 
landuse=highway. It is being used as part of the surroundings of the 
highway. It doesn't doesn't stop someone micro mapping to add more detail.


--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)


On 11/01/2017 21:40, Warin wrote:

And I disagree with all of them being leisure=garden.
The green patches between a road and a footway are not 'leisure' 
things .. they are 'safety' things .. particularly beside busy roads.


If these same areas were covered with concrete .. would you still 
think of them as 'leisure'? In other words .. are you associating the 
'cover' with the 'use' of these areas?


Approach =the problem from 2 different ways of thinking -

What is the 'cover' ... landcover ?

and then

What is the 'use' ... landuse?

Once you divide those 2 things up it makes it clearer what is there.

On 11-Jan-17 10:22 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote:

@Marc Zoutendijk

thanks for the photos.
I agree with all of them as leisure=garden, except for the bottom 
right one. From the photo it is not clear whether this is spontaneous 
vegetation or planted vegetation. Only n the latter case I would 
accept  the garden concept


On 11 January 2017 at 10:56, Marc Zoutendijk > wrote:




Op 10 jan. 2017, om 05:14 heeft Marc Gemis > het volgende geschreven:

I thought the original question was broader than just the patches of
green next to the road. I also want to know how to map those green
patches when they are not part of roundabouts, or are located
between
sidewalk and road (where cars drive).


To help us focus on what type of “green” I’m (and others) are
thinking of, I have prepared a photo-collage:

https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/guN1x7PBfZfP1ZR


At the core of all this we we see:

- areas of any size but more often small
- a variety of grass, plants, flowers and trees in any number and
combination
- located mostly inside urban areas
- there is not normally an entrance to the area but sometime a
footpath divides it

Tagging this with leisure=garden covers all situations quiet
well, save for the “entrance” part.
One other idea was to add the operator=* tag. E.g.
operator=municipality.

One of the other possibilities (proposed in the Dutch Forum) to
tackle this problem, is to redifine village_green to mean
something different in The Netherlands then in the UK. Such local
meaning of tags we also see for highway tagging.

Marc Zoutendijk






___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Warin]

And I disagree with all of them being leisure=garden.
The green patches between a road and a footway are not 'leisure' things 
.. they are 'safety' things .. particularly beside busy roads.


If these same areas were covered with concrete .. would you still think 
of them as 'leisure'? In other words .. are you associating the 'cover' 
with the 'use' of these areas?


Approach =the problem from 2 different ways of thinking -

What is the 'cover' ... landcover ?

and then

What is the 'use' ... landuse?

Once you divide those 2 things up it makes it clearer what is there.

On 11-Jan-17 10:22 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote:

@Marc Zoutendijk

thanks for the photos.
I agree with all of them as leisure=garden, except for the bottom 
right one. From the photo it is not clear whether this is spontaneous 
vegetation or planted vegetation. Only n the latter case I would 
accept  the garden concept


On 11 January 2017 at 10:56, Marc Zoutendijk > wrote:




Op 10 jan. 2017, om 05:14 heeft Marc Gemis > het volgende geschreven:

I thought the original question was broader than just the patches of
green next to the road. I also want to know how to map those green
patches when they are not part of roundabouts, or are located between
sidewalk and road (where cars drive).


To help us focus on what type of “green” I’m (and others) are
thinking of, I have prepared a photo-collage:

https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/guN1x7PBfZfP1ZR


At the core of all this we we see:

- areas of any size but more often small
- a variety of grass, plants, flowers and trees in any number and
combination
- located mostly inside urban areas
- there is not normally an entrance to the area but sometime a
footpath divides it

Tagging this with leisure=garden covers all situations quiet well,
save for the “entrance” part.
One other idea was to add the operator=* tag. E.g.
operator=municipality.

One of the other possibilities (proposed in the Dutch Forum) to
tackle this problem, is to redifine village_green to mean
something different in The Netherlands then in the UK. Such local
meaning of tags we also see for highway tagging.

Marc Zoutendijk




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging





___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-01-11 12:45 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis :

> The wiki page on garden [1] explicitly mentions private gardens, e.g.
> around castles.
> So yes, for a private garden, you will have the tags:
> landuse=residential, access=private, leisure=garden + smaller polygons
> with landcover tags for grass areas, flowers, bushes, trees and
> parhaps natural=water for ponds.
>



for gardens there are also additional attributes available:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:garden:type
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:garden:style

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[John Willis]

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 6:56 PM, Marc Zoutendijk  wrote:
> 
> To help us focus on what type of “green” I’m (and others) are thinking of, I 
> have prepared a photo-collage:
> 
> https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/guN1x7PBfZfP1ZR 
> 



most everything in the photos looks like hedges to me. no one is going to walk 
through them or on top of them. 

The picture center-right has an interesting landcover: is that wood chips? 
natural=scrub? the outside is clearly a hedge. 

reading the images top-to-bottom and left-to-right (like reading):

landcover=grass, with a hedge line and a tree. 

landcover=grass

barrier=hedge, tree points on the opposite side of the street. 

a barrier=hedge around this section of a parking lot island.  **the area inside 
I don’t think has a tag**

barrier=hedge along the walkway / barrier=hedge with a tree in it. 

building=roof (or however a trellis is tagged) + some trees + barrier hedge 
between the walkways 

barrier=hedge along the street. points for trees. 

barrier=hedge area along barrier=fence way

natural=scrub 


here is the road I was driving down in tokyo I talked about earlier. everything 
in the area is hedges to me (with a couple trees thrown in) 

https://goo.gl/maps/Hnmks8MDJsC2  

most are on areas along barrier=fence ways. 

https://goo.gl/maps/swKt1wpybY52  
Hedges & ginko trees.  

this is the kind of scenario where I would have difficulty: 

https://goo.gl/maps/u3MYPMFKEnG2  

The foreground is fallow rice fields - easy. but along the embankment is 
purposefully planted trees and shrubs (and a hedge!), but it is basically only 
trimmed back once a year. most of the time it looks like natural=scrub, and 
grows down into the road below the motorway every summer. I tagged a bunch of 
this as scrub in the past, but I’m not sure now. 

finding a good definition for this purposefully landscaped area, which is 
(intermittantly) tended to and includes mixes of trees and bushes and grasses 
is a good tag. 

perhaps landcover=greenery? I don’t know. 

Javbw. 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Gemis]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Yves  wrote:
> Garden with access=no? Only for the eyes.

The wiki page on garden [1] explicitly mentions private gardens, e.g.
around castles.
So yes, for a private garden, you will have the tags:
landuse=residential, access=private, leisure=garden + smaller polygons
with landcover tags for grass areas, flowers, bushes, trees and
parhaps natural=water for ponds.

I'm not sure about the residential landuse. Perhaps you could think of
recreation_area as well (the wiki page does mention that
recreation_areas can be private as well).

m.


[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgarden

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[John Willis]

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 7:42 PM, Marc Gemis  wrote:
> 
>  think every place in the world should ideally belong to:
> - a landuse
> - a landcover polygon

That is awesome. 

If you have a building, the plants and trees around the building belongs to the 
land the building sits on, just like the parking lot, driveway, and the wall or 
fence surrounding the single named place..  all those things are an “amenity” 
of the building. A park may have more non-green than green - but the land use 
is related to the park itself. the same is true for the bushes growing along 
it’s fence that separates it from the road or the adjacent houses. 

In places, like rural areas, natural areas, or some place like slums or war 
ravaged areas where boundries are not easy to discern, I understand how 
defining landuses can be difficult, but we are talking about mapping the bushes 
in between buildings in this post, so the idea of understanding where large 
landuses (like a mall, school, apartment complex, highway infrastructure, etc) 
is really easy to discern and therefore easy to map. 

This is why in the past I was pushing for other generic landuse values (like 
civic), because everything in a urban environment should be covered by a 
landuse of some kind - and there are several *gaping holes* in landuse 
definitions. 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic#Missing_Landuse
 


Tying a landuse to it’s landcover is just a relic of old tagging schema.  

in the interim, bushes and shrubs and other things that impede people from 
occupying the land in an urban environ that is not another type of tag 
(flowerbed, tree, etc) should be tagged as barrier=hedge IMO. It is a barrier, 
it s a hedge in the loose sense (there is no single type, size, or plant type 
of hedge), and it easily works with macro and micromapping. 

if people want something more descriptive and something in the landcover= key 
like “urban_greenery” as a catchall for urban non-grass non-flowerbed  non-tree 
plants -  great, lets do it - but barrier hedge fits the bill pretty good 
already. no one is going to be cutting through such areas in an urban/sububan 
setting, while a landcover=grass would easily be walked over. 

After thinking about the value, I am against "landscaping", as it is the 
*arrangement* of the bushes and dirt that makes it landscaped. Some landscaping 
is rocks and gravel and placement of boulders.  A lot of the urban hedges are 
just filler, walls, or a pretty "fence" to impede jaywalking - all jobs of 
barriers. 

Javbw___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Volker Schmidt]

leisure=garden AND access=no is in use and makes sense in at least some of
these cases.
Example 1:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/415758264#map=19/45.28172/11.86906
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/YpCZViSYxsck1Y--w1yoFw
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/I19C6pBr9Bz9nUzXysWS3A

Example 2
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/404967171
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/koBz27rG1tQ2tb8cjWQrvQ

Example 3
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/377161140#map=19/45.35135/11.86874
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/0Ky2y0mdxAPg7p7RP6npLQ

On 11 January 2017 at 11:52, Yves  wrote:

> Garden with access=no? Only for the eyes.
> Yves
>
>
> Le 11 janvier 2017 10:56:02 GMT+01:00, Marc Zoutendijk <
> marczoutend...@mac.com> a écrit :
>>
>>
>> Op 10 jan. 2017, om 05:14 heeft Marc Gemis  het
>> volgende geschreven:
>>
>> I thought the original question was broader than just the patches of
>> green next to the road. I also want to know how to map those green
>> patches when they are not part of roundabouts, or are located between
>> sidewalk and road (where cars drive).
>>
>>
>> To help us focus on what type of “green” I’m (and others) are thinking
>> of, I have prepared a photo-collage:
>>
>> https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/guN1x7PBfZfP1ZR
>>
>> At the core of all this we we see:
>>
>> - areas of any size but more often small
>> - a variety of grass, plants, flowers and trees in any number and
>> combination
>> - located mostly inside urban areas
>> - there is not normally an entrance to the area but sometime a footpath
>> divides it
>>
>> Tagging this with leisure=garden covers all situations quiet well, save
>> for the “entrance” part.
>> One other idea was to add the operator=* tag. E.g. operator=municipality.
>>
>> One of the other possibilities (proposed in the Dutch Forum) to tackle
>> this problem, is to redifine village_green to mean something different in
>> The Netherlands then in the UK. Such local meaning of tags we also see for
>> highway tagging.
>>
>> Marc Zoutendijk
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Volker Schmidt]

@Marc Zoutendijk

thanks for the photos.
I agree with all of them as leisure=garden, except for the bottom right
one. From the photo it is not clear whether this is spontaneous vegetation
or planted vegetation. Only n the latter case I would accept  the garden
concept

On 11 January 2017 at 10:56, Marc Zoutendijk  wrote:

>
> Op 10 jan. 2017, om 05:14 heeft Marc Gemis  het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> I thought the original question was broader than just the patches of
> green next to the road. I also want to know how to map those green
> patches when they are not part of roundabouts, or are located between
> sidewalk and road (where cars drive).
>
>
> To help us focus on what type of “green” I’m (and others) are thinking of,
> I have prepared a photo-collage:
>
> https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/guN1x7PBfZfP1ZR
>
> At the core of all this we we see:
>
> - areas of any size but more often small
> - a variety of grass, plants, flowers and trees in any number and
> combination
> - located mostly inside urban areas
> - there is not normally an entrance to the area but sometime a footpath
> divides it
>
> Tagging this with leisure=garden covers all situations quiet well, save
> for the “entrance” part.
> One other idea was to add the operator=* tag. E.g. operator=municipality.
>
> One of the other possibilities (proposed in the Dutch Forum) to tackle
> this problem, is to redifine village_green to mean something different in
> The Netherlands then in the UK. Such local meaning of tags we also see for
> highway tagging.
>
> Marc Zoutendijk
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Yves]

Garden with access=no?  Only for the eyes. 
Yves

Le 11 janvier 2017 10:56:02 GMT+01:00, Marc Zoutendijk  
a écrit :
>
>> Op 10 jan. 2017, om 05:14 heeft Marc Gemis  het
>volgende geschreven:
>> 
>> I thought the original question was broader than just the patches of
>> green next to the road. I also want to know how to map those green
>> patches when they are not part of roundabouts, or are located between
>> sidewalk and road (where cars drive).
>
>To help us focus on what type of “green” I’m (and others) are thinking
>of, I have prepared a photo-collage:
>
>https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/guN1x7PBfZfP1ZR
>
>
>At the core of all this we we see:
>
>- areas of any size but more often small
>- a variety of grass, plants, flowers and trees in any number and
>combination
>- located mostly inside urban areas 
>- there is not normally an entrance to the area but sometime a footpath
>divides it
>
>Tagging this with leisure=garden covers all situations quiet well, save
>for the “entrance” part.
>One other idea was to add the operator=* tag. E.g.
>operator=municipality.
>
>One of the other possibilities (proposed in the Dutch Forum) to tackle
>this problem, is to redifine village_green to mean something different
>in The Netherlands then in the UK. Such local meaning of tags we also
>see for highway tagging.
>
>Marc Zoutendijk

-- 
Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Gemis]

As I wrote on the Dutch forum, I see at least some leisure=park,
leisure=garden, natural=grassfield, natural=water+water=pond on your
photos.
You loose a lot of information if you map them all with village_green.
IMHO, a "village_green" outside the UK is a park, garden or
recreation_ground in OSM terminology.
it does not apply to the small patches of "green" on the sides of
roads or playground. They deserve another tag.

I think every place in the world should ideally belong to
- a landuse
- a landcover
polygon

additionally you can add leisure (park, garden, etc) or amenity (pub,
playground, etc.) on top of them.



On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Marc Zoutendijk
 wrote:
>
> Op 10 jan. 2017, om 05:14 heeft Marc Gemis  het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> I thought the original question was broader than just the patches of
> green next to the road. I also want to know how to map those green
> patches when they are not part of roundabouts, or are located between
> sidewalk and road (where cars drive).
>
>
> To help us focus on what type of “green” I’m (and others) are thinking of, I
> have prepared a photo-collage:
>
> https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/guN1x7PBfZfP1ZR
>
> At the core of all this we we see:
>
> - areas of any size but more often small
> - a variety of grass, plants, flowers and trees in any number and
> combination
> - located mostly inside urban areas
> - there is not normally an entrance to the area but sometime a footpath
> divides it
>
> Tagging this with leisure=garden covers all situations quiet well, save for
> the “entrance” part.
> One other idea was to add the operator=* tag. E.g. operator=municipality.
>
> One of the other possibilities (proposed in the Dutch Forum) to tackle this
> problem, is to redifine village_green to mean something different in The
> Netherlands then in the UK. Such local meaning of tags we also see for
> highway tagging.
>
> Marc Zoutendijk
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> Op 10 jan. 2017, om 05:14 heeft Marc Gemis  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> I thought the original question was broader than just the patches of
> green next to the road. I also want to know how to map those green
> patches when they are not part of roundabouts, or are located between
> sidewalk and road (where cars drive).

To help us focus on what type of “green” I’m (and others) are thinking of, I 
have prepared a photo-collage:

https://marczoutendijk.stackstorage.com/s/guN1x7PBfZfP1ZR 


At the core of all this we we see:

- areas of any size but more often small
- a variety of grass, plants, flowers and trees in any number and combination
- located mostly inside urban areas 
- there is not normally an entrance to the area but sometime a footpath divides 
it

Tagging this with leisure=garden covers all situations quiet well, save for the 
“entrance” part.
One other idea was to add the operator=* tag. E.g. operator=municipality.

One of the other possibilities (proposed in the Dutch Forum) to tackle this 
problem, is to redifine village_green to mean something different in The 
Netherlands then in the UK. Such local meaning of tags we also see for highway 
tagging.

Marc Zoutendijk



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Gemis]

I thought the original question was broader than just the patches of
green next to the road. I also want to know how to map those green
patches when they are not part of roundabouts, or are located between
sidewalk and road (where cars drive).

What about the green patches around public buildings ? Next to
playgrounds ? Do they get landuse=civic, or leisure=recreation_area ?
And to repeat you question, what if on the other side there is a
railway, a street etc.

Is "green" considered a garden when it is around a building, but not
when it is between a cycleway and the main road ?

And what about the large grass areas in village centers ? Park,
recreation, garden ?

m

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> However this use of the tag landuse=grass is not consistent with any other
> landuse tag.
> It at the very least confuses mappers!
>
> The only 'use' I can think of for grass by the land is that of production
> and harvesting.
> Anything else is a simple coverage.
> The wiki says
>
> A tag for a smaller areas of mown and managed grass for example in the
> middle of a roundabout, verges beside a road or in the middle of a
> dual-carriageway. Should not be used where a more specific tag is available.
>
> It is typical that landuse=grass is misused and should be changed to
> landcover=grass (for example: patches of grass between tracks in railway
> corridor - area that should be tagged with landuse=railway).
>
>
> So a patch of grass beside a road has a different tag than the same patch of
> grass beside a railway!
>
> What happens when the patch of grass has a highway on one side and a railway
> on the other ? Ridiculous!!!

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Ralph Aytoun]

When I was maintaining survey plans the landuse=highway would cover the
extent of the area owned and maintained by the highways agency and not just
the highway itself. This area would include the highways, the soft or hard
shoulders, sidewalks (pavements), roundabouts and islands, central
reservations, the landscaped and lawn areas, the buffer areas, the
trees/shrubs/barriers for soundproofing and the fences/barriers along the
outer perimeter to keep animals and humans off the highway.
Even in the towns the landuse=residential would be islands separated by
landuse=highway, which would include all maintained roads, sidewalks and 
adjoining land acquired for the road servitude.
Depicting landuse=highway like this would be cartographically correct and 
any features within this road servitude would be tagged accordingly.


Ralph

-Original Message- 
From: John Willis

Sent: Monday, January 9, 2017 11:40 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to 
use?




On Jan 10, 2017, at 5:49 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:


The wiki page has been reverted. Stop trolling.

tom


Not trolling. Raising the discussion, waving the flag ... this tag is 
something I trip over every now and then and it really annoys me.


As a person who "raised the discussion" around here in the past, you can 
pretty much say whatever you want - but doing unilateral changes to an 
established tag is not accepted community behavior. Documenting an existing 
in-use tag by creating a new page, fine - but changing the def to break such 
a well used tag is not good etiquette.


Changing the tag to discourage use in favor of other tags (like landuse=farm 
was depreciated) is also something people do -


But going and changing the wiki page unilaterally to break existing usage 
just gets you a reverted wiki page and a scowl from members of the 
community. Which is what just happened.


Hash it out here (where very little gets changed) instead of doing by 
yourself (where your big change is reverted to nothing).


Your point about how a highway overrun being an overrun no matter the 
covering is valid - but you are not going about it in a good way.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[John Willis]

On Jan 10, 2017, at 5:49 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> The wiki page has been reverted. Stop trolling. 
>> 
>> tom 
> 
> Not trolling. Raising the discussion, waving the flag ... this tag is 
> something I trip over every now and then and it really annoys me.

As a person who "raised the discussion" around here in the past, you can pretty 
much say whatever you want - but doing unilateral changes to an established tag 
is not accepted community behavior. Documenting an existing in-use tag by 
creating a new page, fine - but changing the def to break such a well used tag 
is not good etiquette.  

Changing the tag to discourage use in favor of other tags (like landuse=farm 
was depreciated) is also something people do -

But going and changing the wiki page unilaterally to break existing usage just 
gets you a reverted wiki page and a scowl from members of the community. Which 
is what just happened. 

Hash it out here (where very little gets changed) instead of doing by yourself 
(where your big change is reverted to nothing).

Your point about how a highway overrun being an overrun no matter the covering 
is valid - but you are not going about it in a good way. 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Warin]

On 09-Jan-17 10:01 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote:

On 09.01.2017 01:19, Warin wrote:


landuse=grass is for the PRODUCTION of grass - Grass is grown here,
harvested (with a little soil) and transported somewhere and planted.
Then more grass is grown etc.

In the same way landuse=forest is for the Production of things from the
tress grown there.


No. landuse=* as being used in OSM is not only for production and 
harvesting. You don't harvest residents in landuse=residential, do you?


Nor is it for landuse=recreation_ground ... and so on.

However this use of the tag landuse=grass is not consistent with any 
other landuse tag.

It at the very least confuses mappers!

The only 'use' I can think of for grass by the land is that of 
production and harvesting.

Anything else is a simple coverage.
The wiki says

/A tag for a smaller areas of mown and managed //*grass*//for example in 
the middle of a roundabout, verges beside a road or in the middle of a 
dual-carriageway. Should not be used where a more specific tag is 
available. /


/It is typical that //landuse 
=*grass*//is misused and 
should be changed to //landcover 
=grass 
//(for 
example: patches of grass between tracks in railway corridor - area that 
should be tagged with //landuse 
=railway 
//)./


/
/

So a patch of grass beside a road has a different tag than the same 
patch of grass beside a railway!


What happens when the patch of grass has a highway on one side and a 
railway on the other ? Ridiculous!!!


Both should be tagged the same way. And the tagging should be logical.

The truth is these grassed areas beside a road or on a median are used 
by the road to provide safety - they are landuse=highway.


In some places these areas are not grass beside the road but concrete.. 
they are still landuse=highway ...but have a different covering.




On 09.01.2017 10:28, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> Please remember that the wiki is intended to document what the common
> use is, not what the common use should be.
> If you want to change the common use please use the available 
discussion

> channels before changing the wiki.

Absolutely. The tag is used over 2 Million times already for a 
different purpose than you propose here. Do you even know, 
personally,  a place where rolled sods are harvested?




There are areas near me that are used to produce grass, and there are 
areas that produce grass in other parts of the world ... including the 
UK, USA etc.

However I have been doing some further thinking on these.


The wiki page has been reverted. Stop trolling.

tom


Not trolling. Raising the discussion, waving the flag ... this tag is 
something I trip over every now and then and it really annoys me.


Where I come across it in my mapping I then to add the tag 
landcover=grass ...so both tags are there, in this way it still renders, 
but clearly indicates what should be there - and it is not landuse=grass.


Breakfast for me.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Rene]

Hi,

I'm one of the contributors who started this discussion in the Dutch 
forum as Marc mentioned in his first post. And as I noticed here the 
discussion is becoming bigger and bigger. Which is fine of course but 
I'm afraid it will not result in a nice obvious tag for mixed vegetation.


So what I like to do is to vote for the best tag (key and value). For 
this we need a few examples for instance Google pictures (e.g. search 
for "street vegetation") and we need keys and values in which we can 
choose from. After one month we decide by majority vote.


Let start with the key's to choose from:

landuse=
landcover=
nature=
leisure=
barrier=

Next choose one of the values discussed before in this discussion list 
(if you know a better one let's here it!):


village_green
municipality_green
municipality_vegetation
park
trees
shrubs
flowers
grass
garden
forest
green_spaces
flowerbeds
hedge
scrub
landscaping

A few made up values from the Dutch forum:

mixed_vegetation
street_vegetation
urban_green

Again keep in mind this tag is for mixed situations as the pictures in 
Google (search: "street vegetation) will show you.


Thanks for voting and good luck!

Rene

Op 9-1-2017 om 12:02 schreef Dave F:


On 09/01/2017 09:28, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Please remember that the wiki is intended to document what the common 
use is, not what the common use should be.
If you want to change the common use please use the available 
discussion channels before changing the wiki.


Volker


I disagree with this. The wiki is guidance for what is considered, 
especially for newbies, to be the correct way to tag. I confess this 
is subjective & open to (very long ) discussions, but to believe a tag 
is correct just because it's in the majority is incorrect.


As an example I give water=river/canal/stream which is now preferred 
over waterway=riverbank, even though there are fewer occurrences at 
this point in time.


DaveF

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Dave F]

On 09/01/2017 09:28, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Please remember that the wiki is intended to document what the common 
use is, not what the common use should be.
If you want to change the common use please use the available 
discussion channels before changing the wiki.


Volker


I disagree with this. The wiki is guidance for what is considered, 
especially for newbies, to be the correct way to tag. I confess this is 
subjective & open to (very long ) discussions, but to believe a tag is 
correct just because it's in the majority is incorrect.


As an example I give water=river/canal/stream which is now preferred 
over waterway=riverbank, even though there are fewer occurrences at this 
point in time.


DaveF

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 09.01.2017 01:19, Warin wrote:


landuse=grass is for the PRODUCTION of grass - Grass is grown here,
harvested (with a little soil) and transported somewhere and planted.
Then more grass is grown etc.

In the same way landuse=forest is for the Production of things from the
tress grown there.


No. landuse=* as being used in OSM is not only for production and 
harvesting. You don't harvest residents in landuse=residential, do you?


On 09.01.2017 10:28, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> Please remember that the wiki is intended to document what the common
> use is, not what the common use should be.
> If you want to change the common use please use the available discussion
> channels before changing the wiki.

Absolutely. The tag is used over 2 Million times already for a different 
purpose than you propose here. Do you even know, personally,  a place 
where rolled sods are harvested?


The wiki page has been reverted. Stop trolling.

tom


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Volker Schmidt]

Please remember that the wiki is intended to document what the common use
is, not what the common use should be.
If you want to change the common use please use the available discussion
channels before changing the wiki.

Volker

On 9 January 2017 at 01:42, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 09-Jan-17 11:19 AM, Warin wrote:
>
> On 09-Jan-17 08:35 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
> <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Landuse is a tag that is not about what is there - trees, shrubs, flowers,
> concrete etc ... but the USE of the area.
>
> A park is used for relaxation.
> A recreation_ground is used for recreation (physical activity). And so on.
>
>
> So the the land use under discussion is green, diminutive, and
> decorative yet inaccessible (or inadvisable) -- green median of a dual
> carriageway, plantings in a roundabout center -- Do we have a term in
> our taxonomy for that, either in landuse=* or some other, and if not,
> what should it be?  is that the question ?
>
> landuse=* may be the wrong tag. Landuse studies normally talk about
> larger areas than 14m2 ... see [1] "For example a leisure=park tag may
> be used to describe a park within a landuse=residential area, or for a
> very large park may be the primary landuse. "
>
>
> the Landuse [1] page decries landuse=grass because it's a cover not a
> use,
>
>
> landuse=grass is for the PRODUCTION of grass - Grass is grown here,
> harvested (with a little soil) and transported somewhere and planted. Then
> more grass is grown etc.
>
> In the same way landuse=forest is for the Production of things from the
> tress grown there.
>
> See http://www.freshturf.co.uk/
>
> but elsewhere [2] it is documented as the appropriate tag for a
> roundabout center.
>
> So yes we have a tag in use, but there are reasons it may be wrong.
>
> If plantings are particularly nice, i suppose it could rise to a
> leisure=garden, garden:[type,style]=*, access=no
> but the average roundabout or median has a flower box or a mass of
> perennials, not anything i or the maintainers of [3] would admit was a
> garden.
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landuse
> [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass
> [3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgarden
>
>
> I have now made a *MAJOR* change to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/
> wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass ... to reflect what I think should be there.
>
> Feel free to disagree ... I'll only argue back :)
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Yves]

John,  maybe you have something in your post: landcover=landscaping? 
Yves 

Le 9 janvier 2017 07:25:05 GMT+01:00, John Willis  a écrit :
>
>
>
>> On Jan 9, 2017, at 1:39 PM, Bill Ricker  wrote:
>> 
>> It would be a great option, but that's not what the gardeners
>> maintaining the traffic islands, rotary or otherwise, are planting
>> here.
>
>tl;dr:
>
>Tagging the trees and the flowerbeds is great - but all that other 1-3m
>tall green crap people maintain around roads is all hedges to me,
>unless it is just scrub or another wild landuse for unmaintained
>places. 
>
>~
>
>The road I'm driving in Tokyo right now has 3 types of (very thick)
>bushes along the road separating the road traffic from the pedestrians,
>some small mullberry trees and vines growing on frames to emulate a
>hedge. 
>
>Out in the rural spots, the "grass" on small little places around the
>roads is usually thick weeds. 
>
>It's all barrier=hedge to me. Tag the trees if you can.
>
>The grass in a highway median is overrun for out of control cars -
>clearly landuse=highway + landcover=grass.  Grass in the center of a
>roundabout would be too.
>
>The hedges and landscaping are blocking People from walking, biking, or
>from dumping their garbage - or as some kind of landscaping to prevent
>people casually walking in the area - seems like barrier=hedge to me.
>Flowerbeds are great and very specific - but how often are there tended
>beds of flowers? 
>
>They may not be hedgerows, but it is a barrier in many cases. They may
>be little bushes or vines. Or little tree shaped things. But as a
>group, it is a barrier, similar to how barrier=rope is a barrier - more
>symbolic than forceful. 
>
>
>Javbw. 
>
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[John Willis]

> On Jan 9, 2017, at 1:39 PM, Bill Ricker  wrote:
> 
> It would be a great option, but that's not what the gardeners
> maintaining the traffic islands, rotary or otherwise, are planting
> here.

tl;dr:

Tagging the trees and the flowerbeds is great - but all that other 1-3m tall 
green crap people maintain around roads is all hedges to me, unless it is just 
scrub or another wild landuse for unmaintained places. 

~

The road I'm driving in Tokyo right now has 3 types of (very thick) bushes 
along the road separating the road traffic from the pedestrians, some small 
mullberry trees and vines growing on frames to emulate a hedge. 

Out in the rural spots, the "grass" on small little places around the roads is 
usually thick weeds. 

It's all barrier=hedge to me. Tag the trees if you can.

The grass in a highway median is overrun for out of control cars - clearly 
landuse=highway + landcover=grass.  Grass in the center of a roundabout would 
be too.

The hedges and landscaping are blocking People from walking, biking, or from 
dumping their garbage - or as some kind of landscaping to prevent people 
casually walking in the area - seems like barrier=hedge to me. Flowerbeds are 
great and very specific - but how often are there tended beds of flowers? 

They may not be hedgerows, but it is a barrier in many cases. They may be 
little bushes or vines. Or little tree shaped things. But as a group, it is a 
barrier, similar to how barrier=rope is a barrier - more symbolic than 
forceful. 


Javbw. 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:51 PM, John Willis  wrote:
> Hedge is of great use in this situation

It would be a great option, but that's not what the gardeners
maintaining the traffic islands, rotary or otherwise, are planting
here.

-- 
Bill Ricker
bill.n1...@gmail.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[John Willis]

> On Jan 9, 2017, at 5:02 AM, Marc Zoutendijk  wrote:
> 
> you find also in the middle of a roundabout.
> Adn I wouldn’t call an area of 14m2 between two sections of a highway,

Hedge is of great use in this situation. 

Javbw___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Warin]

On 09-Jan-17 11:19 AM, Warin wrote:

On 09-Jan-17 08:35 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:

On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
Landuse is a tag that is not about what is there - trees, shrubs, 
flowers,

concrete etc ... but the USE of the area.

A park is used for relaxation.
A recreation_ground is used for recreation (physical activity). And 
so on.


So the the land use under discussion is green, diminutive, and
decorative yet inaccessible (or inadvisable) -- green median of a dual
carriageway, plantings in a roundabout center -- Do we have a term in
our taxonomy for that, either in landuse=* or some other, and if not,
what should it be?  is that the question ?

landuse=* may be the wrong tag. Landuse studies normally talk about
larger areas than 14m2 ... see [1] "For example a leisure=park tag may
be used to describe a park within a landuse=residential area, or for a
very large park may be the primary landuse. "


the Landuse [1] page decries landuse=grass because it's a cover not a
use,


landuse=grass is for the PRODUCTION of grass - Grass is grown here, 
harvested (with a little soil) and transported somewhere and planted. 
Then more grass is grown etc.


In the same way landuse=forest is for the Production of things from 
the tress grown there.


See http://www.freshturf.co.uk/


but elsewhere [2] it is documented as the appropriate tag for a
roundabout center.

So yes we have a tag in use, but there are reasons it may be wrong.

If plantings are particularly nice, i suppose it could rise to a
leisure=garden, garden:[type,style]=*, access=no
but the average roundabout or median has a flower box or a mass of
perennials, not anything i or the maintainers of [3] would admit was a
garden.

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landuse
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass
[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgarden


I have now made a _MAJOR_ change to 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass ... to reflect 
what I think should be there.


Feel free to disagree ... I'll only argue back :)


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Warin]

On 09-Jan-17 08:35 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:

On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

Landuse is a tag that is not about what is there - trees, shrubs, flowers,
concrete etc ... but the USE of the area.

A park is used for relaxation.
A recreation_ground is used for recreation (physical activity). And so on.


So the the land use under discussion is green, diminutive, and
decorative yet inaccessible (or inadvisable) -- green median of a dual
carriageway, plantings in a roundabout center -- Do we have a term in
our taxonomy for that, either in landuse=* or some other, and if not,
what should it be?  is that the question ?

landuse=* may be the wrong tag. Landuse studies normally talk about
larger areas than 14m2 ... see [1] "For example a leisure=park tag may
be used to describe a park within a landuse=residential area, or for a
very large park may be the primary landuse. "


the Landuse [1] page decries landuse=grass because it's a cover not a
use,


landuse=grass is for the PRODUCTION of grass - Grass is grown here, 
harvested (with a little soil) and transported somewhere and planted. 
Then more grass is grown etc.


In the same way landuse=forest is for the Production of things from the 
tress grown there.


See http://www.freshturf.co.uk/


but elsewhere [2] it is documented as the appropriate tag for a
roundabout center.

So yes we have a tag in use, but there are reasons it may be wrong.

If plantings are particularly nice, i suppose it could rise to a
leisure=garden, garden:[type,style]=*, access=no
but the average roundabout or median has a flower box or a mass of
perennials, not anything i or the maintainers of [3] would admit was a
garden.

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landuse
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass
[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgarden




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Warin]

On 09-Jan-17 09:49 AM, Wolfgang Zenker wrote:

* Marc Zoutendijk  [170108 21:02]:

Op 8 jan. 2017, om 20:20 heeft Tod Fitch  het volgende 
geschreven:
Based on usage in the United States, it sure sounds like leisure=park is the 
tag to use for what you are describing. I see nothing in the wiki page [1] for 
park that indicates it must be a minimum size, have a wall, a discrete entrance 
or that it has to have a name.  There are a lot of areas local to me called 
parks, that are tagged with leisure=park and which do not have fences/walls/or 
gates. And some of the smaller ones (colloquially called “mini-parks”) don’t 
seem to have names either.

To me a park is some place that you gan "go into”. E.g." let’s go out for a 
stroll in the park.”
The wiki:
"Typically open to the public, but may be fenced off, and may be temporarily 
closed e.g. at night time.”
But i’m talking also about the areas that you find also in the middle of a 
roundabout.
Adn I wouldn’t call an area of 14m2 between two sections of a highway, covered 
with grass and some flowers a “park”.
No, there really must be something better (I hope) to describe this sort of 
landuse.

The process of creating and maintaining these green spaces would be called
"urban landscaping" as far as I know. Unfortunately I can't find a better
word for these areas than "green spaces".

Wolfgang



Road medians and islands are part of the road infrastructure .. so the 
'landuse' would be for the highway ... much like emergency lanes, 
emergency bays, parking areas.
See landuse=railway for ideas ... 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Drailway
I would note that at least some landuse=railway would have grass, 
flowers etc ... so I don't think landuse=grass etc should be used at all 
for landcover.


At the moment I don't tag these at that kind of detail. Way too much 
else to do.


I think things like 'flowerbeds' should be a land cover tag (presently 
under the poor tag of 'natural' in OSM).


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 08.01.2017 19:59, Marc Zoutendijk napisał(a):


They are not to be confused with a garden or a park, because those
usually have some sort of fence or wall around them, they can have a
name and they have an entrance.


This is also not that easy. I have problems with recognizing parks from 
gardens and green squares.



One of the proposals for this (mixed) type of landuse is
“municipality_green” or "municipality_vegetation", and before we
continue with its use, I would like to learn what kind of discussions
have been had before about tagging this kind of landuse.
I read various discussions on the German forum and started one in the
Dutch forum [2], but could not find anything recently in the tagging
archives. Anyone who knows (something) better?


I like your proposition, thanks for trying to solve it. In Poland we 
commonly use term "municipality green" ("zieleń miejska").


In some cases you can use quite popular draft landuse=flowerbed, which 
is a part of municipality green:


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dflowerbed

--
"A dragon lives forever but not so little boys" [L. Lipton]

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Wolfgang Zenker]

* Marc Zoutendijk  [170108 21:02]:
>> Op 8 jan. 2017, om 20:20 heeft Tod Fitch  het volgende 
>> geschreven:

>> Based on usage in the United States, it sure sounds like leisure=park is the 
>> tag to use for what you are describing. I see nothing in the wiki page [1] 
>> for park that indicates it must be a minimum size, have a wall, a discrete 
>> entrance or that it has to have a name.  There are a lot of areas local to 
>> me called parks, that are tagged with leisure=park and which do not have 
>> fences/walls/or gates. And some of the smaller ones (colloquially called 
>> “mini-parks”) don’t seem to have names either.

> To me a park is some place that you gan "go into”. E.g." let’s go out for a 
> stroll in the park.”

> The wiki:

> "Typically open to the public, but may be fenced off, and may be temporarily 
> closed e.g. at night time.”

> But i’m talking also about the areas that you find also in the middle of a 
> roundabout.
> Adn I wouldn’t call an area of 14m2 between two sections of a highway, 
> covered with grass and some flowers a “park”.

> No, there really must be something better (I hope) to describe this sort of 
> landuse.

The process of creating and maintaining these green spaces would be called
"urban landscaping" as far as I know. Unfortunately I can't find a better
word for these areas than "green spaces".

Wolfgang

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Landuse is a tag that is not about what is there - trees, shrubs, flowers,
> concrete etc ... but the USE of the area.
>
> A park is used for relaxation.
> A recreation_ground is used for recreation (physical activity). And so on.


So the the land use under discussion is green, diminutive, and
decorative yet inaccessible (or inadvisable) -- green median of a dual
carriageway, plantings in a roundabout center -- Do we have a term in
our taxonomy for that, either in landuse=* or some other, and if not,
what should it be?  is that the question ?

landuse=* may be the wrong tag. Landuse studies normally talk about
larger areas than 14m2 ... see [1] "For example a leisure=park tag may
be used to describe a park within a landuse=residential area, or for a
very large park may be the primary landuse. "


the Landuse [1] page decries landuse=grass because it's a cover not a
use, but elsewhere [2] it is documented as the appropriate tag for a
roundabout center.

So yes we have a tag in use, but there are reasons it may be wrong.

If plantings are particularly nice, i suppose it could rise to a
   leisure=garden, garden:[type,style]=*, access=no
but the average roundabout or median has a flower box or a mass of
perennials, not anything i or the maintainers of [3] would admit was a
garden.

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landuse
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass
[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgarden

-- 
Bill Ricker
bill.n1...@gmail.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Warin]

On 09-Jan-17 07:02 AM, Marc Zoutendijk wrote:


Op 8 jan. 2017, om 20:20 heeft Tod Fitch > het volgende geschreven:


Based on usage in the United States, it sure sounds like leisure=park 
is the tag to use for what you are describing. I see nothing in the 
wiki page [1] for park that indicates it must be a minimum size, have 
a wall, a discrete entrance or that it has to have a name.  There are 
a lot of areas local to me called parks, that are tagged with 
leisure=park and which do not have fences/walls/or gates. And some of 
the smaller ones (colloquially called “mini-parks”) don’t seem to 
have names either.




Todd,

To me a park is some place that you gan "go into”. E.g." let’s go out 
for a stroll in the park.”


The wiki:

"Typically open to the public, but may be fenced off, and may be 
temporarily closed e.g. at night time.”


But i’m talking also about the areas that you find also in the middle 
of a roundabout.
Adn I wouldn’t call an area of 14m2 between two sections of a highway, 
covered with grass and some flowers a “park”.


No, there really must be something better (I hope) to describe this 
sort of landuse.


Marc.


Landuse is a tag that is not about what is there - trees, shrubs, 
flowers, concrete etc ... but the USE of the area.


A park is used for relaxation.
A recreation_ground is used for recreation (physical activity). And so on.

While some parks may have a fence around them, some don't.
There is no requirement for a park to have a fence nor should there be - 
remember OSM is world wide .. what is common practice in one part of the 
world may be exceptional in another part.


landuse=village_green I take to be a 'common' in Australia as that too 
has legal status in Australia similar to 'village_green' in the UK.


If the USE of the area fits well with any current tag .. then use that tag.
Physical objects, like fences, have other tags that can be used to 
indicate their presence.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> Op 8 jan. 2017, om 20:20 heeft Tod Fitch  het volgende 
> geschreven:
> 
> Based on usage in the United States, it sure sounds like leisure=park is the 
> tag to use for what you are describing. I see nothing in the wiki page [1] 
> for park that indicates it must be a minimum size, have a wall, a discrete 
> entrance or that it has to have a name.  There are a lot of areas local to me 
> called parks, that are tagged with leisure=park and which do not have 
> fences/walls/or gates. And some of the smaller ones (colloquially called 
> “mini-parks”) don’t seem to have names either.
> 


Todd,

To me a park is some place that you gan "go into”. E.g." let’s go out for a 
stroll in the park.”

The wiki:

"Typically open to the public, but may be fenced off, and may be temporarily 
closed e.g. at night time.”

But i’m talking also about the areas that you find also in the middle of a 
roundabout.
Adn I wouldn’t call an area of 14m2 between two sections of a highway, covered 
with grass and some flowers a “park”.

No, there really must be something better (I hope) to describe this sort of 
landuse.

Marc.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Tod Fitch]

> On Jan 8, 2017, at 10:59 AM, Marc Zoutendijk  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Some mappers use landuse=village_green to tag those spots on the map that are 
> combinations of grass, plants, bushes, flowers and sometimes a few small 
> trees.
> The size can vary between 1m2 to maybe 100m2-500m2. 
> Areas like those are usually maintained bij the municipality and are used as 
> a means to improve the environment of the inhabitants of a village or city. 
> They are not to be confused with a garden or a park, because those usually 
> have some sort of fence or wall around them, they can have a name and they 
> have an entrance.
> In the Dutch community we are now seeking for a proper tagging for this kind 
> of landuse that consists of various other landuses (forest, grass and others) 
> mixed together.
> 
> The (mis)use of village_green for the landuse like what I described above, 
> stems mainly from a misunderstanding of the typical English definition and 
> use of the village_green as described in the wiki. [1] 
> Not being from Great Britain, I don't understand it either! Some people argue 
> that landuse=village_green cannot exist outside of Great Britain because of 
> its special, legal, status.
> 
> One of the proposals for this (mixed) type of landuse is “municipality_green” 
> or "municipality_vegetation", and before we continue with its use, I would 
> like to learn what kind of discussions have been had before about tagging 
> this kind of landuse. 
> I read various discussions on the German forum and started one in the Dutch 
> forum [2], but could not find anything recently in the tagging archives. 
> Anyone who knows (something) better?
> 
> 
> Marc
> 
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvillage_green 
> 
> [2] https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=56899 
> 
> 

Based on usage in the United States, it sure sounds like leisure=park is the 
tag to use for what you are describing. I see nothing in the wiki page [1] for 
park that indicates it must be a minimum size, have a wall, a discrete entrance 
or that it has to have a name.  There are a lot of areas local to me called 
parks, that are tagged with leisure=park and which do not have fences/walls/or 
gates. And some of the smaller ones (colloquially called “mini-parks”) don’t 
seem to have names either.

FWIW, it sounds like the New England town or village “commons” was based on the 
concept of “village green” stated in the wiki. Since I’ve never lived in New 
England, I am not sure how those commons are treated under current law and 
custom.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

[Marc Zoutendijk]

Hello,

Some mappers use landuse=village_green to tag those spots on the map that are 
combinations of grass, plants, bushes, flowers and sometimes a few small trees.
The size can vary between 1m2 to maybe 100m2-500m2. 
Areas like those are usually maintained bij the municipality and are used as a 
means to improve the environment of the inhabitants of a village or city. 
They are not to be confused with a garden or a park, because those usually have 
some sort of fence or wall around them, they can have a name and they have an 
entrance.
In the Dutch community we are now seeking for a proper tagging for this kind of 
landuse that consists of various other landuses (forest, grass and others) 
mixed together.

The (mis)use of village_green for the landuse like what I described above, 
stems mainly from a misunderstanding of the typical English definition and use 
of the village_green as described in the wiki. [1] 
Not being from Great Britain, I don't understand it either! Some people argue 
that landuse=village_green cannot exist outside of Great Britain because of its 
special, legal, status.

One of the proposals for this (mixed) type of landuse is “municipality_green” 
or "municipality_vegetation", and before we continue with its use, I would like 
to learn what kind of discussions have been had before about tagging this kind 
of landuse. 
I read various discussions on the German forum and started one in the Dutch 
forum [2], but could not find anything recently in the tagging archives. Anyone 
who knows (something) better?


Marc

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvillage_green 

[2] https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=56899 



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging