Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist@... writes:
2011/9/2 Nathan Edgars II neroute2@...:
On 9/2/2011 7:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
+1, I also disagree. I see landuse=forest as the effective area
covered by trees. Hence I would subtract all other entities within.
Disagree with this.
2011/9/3 Johan Jönsson joha...@goteborg.cc:
+1 for using one tag for the whole forested area.
Maybe something along the scheme of natural=wetland, wetland= {more detailed
desc.} Maybe natural=woodland?
no, woodland is an area with less dense trees then in a forest (it is
a special ecological
On 09/01/2011 02:57 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
IMHO there is no landuse inside another landuse (at least for the
true landuses which are the landuses by man.
Do we agree that nested polygons replace, not supplement, the outer polygon?
The rendering seems cool with this, and it makes sense.
On 9/2/2011 3:40 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
On 09/01/2011 02:57 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
IMHO there is no landuse inside another landuse (at least for the
true landuses which are the landuses by man.
Do we agree that nested polygons replace, not supplement, the outer
polygon?
The
2011/9/2 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
On 9/2/2011 3:40 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
The rendering seems cool with this, and it makes sense. If I draw a
forest,
then draw a landuse=reservoir on top of it, those interested in the
forest's true area can subtract out the reservoir. No
On 9/2/2011 7:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
+1, I also disagree. I see landuse=forest as the effective area
covered by trees. Hence I would subtract all other entities within.
Disagree with this. landuse=forest should be the area that is used for
forest purposes, which can include
2011/9/2 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
On 9/2/2011 7:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
+1, I also disagree. I see landuse=forest as the effective area
covered by trees. Hence I would subtract all other entities within.
Disagree with this. landuse=forest should be the area that is used
2011/8/31 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
On 08/31/2011 02:40 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2011/8/31 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
I'm a city dweller. We have some (and will soon have some very prominent)
rooftop parks.
That's fine, you can tag them with leisure=park (or maybe
2011/8/31 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
I'm a city dweller. We have some (and will soon have some very prominent)
rooftop parks.
That's fine, you can tag them with leisure=park (or maybe
leisure=garden, and garden:type)
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgarden
On 30/08/2011 12:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 8/30/2011 6:40 AM, Dave F. wrote:
You appear to be confusing the landuse tag with the boundary tag.
No. You appear to be disagreeing with my use of the boundary tag.
That as well.
Dave F.
___
On 8/31/2011 8:35 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
I thought the issue was that there are two distinct concepts:
boundaries, where there is some legal distinction and a precise edge
place names, which have more or less indistinct boundaries.
In my area, towns have boundaries, and there are
2011/8/31 Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com:
I thought the issue was that there are two distinct concepts:
boundaries, where there is some legal distinction and a precise edge
+1
place names, which have more or less indistinct boundaries.
just because they have no legal status does not mean
* Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com [2011-08-31 08:50 -0400]:
There's a third possibility - the unincorporated suburb or exurb
that nevertheless has a defined boundary, since it's planned or
controlled by one company. I think Columbia, Maryland is this way
It is. Additionally, Columbia
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com writes:
On 8/31/2011 8:35 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
I thought the issue was that there are two distinct concepts:
boundaries, where there is some legal distinction and a precise edge
place names, which have more or less indistinct boundaries.
In
Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com writes:
2011/8/31 Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com:
place names, which have more or less indistinct boundaries.
just because they have no legal status does not mean there aren't
distinct limits. Usually / often there are. There can be natural
limits
Currently, when we search 'quarter' in the wiki, we are redirected to 'suburb':
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Quarterredirect=no
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On 08/31/2011 02:40 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2011/8/31 Bryce Nesbittbry...@obviously.com:
I'm a city dweller. We have some (and will soon have some very prominent)
rooftop parks.
That's fine, you can tag them with leisure=park (or maybe
leisure=garden, and garden:type)
On 30/08/2011 01:27, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 8/29/2011 7:18 PM, Dave F. wrote:
On 29/08/2011 23:35, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 8/29/2011 6:05 PM, Dave F. wrote:
Mapping the difference between a
residential estate a golf course is, IMO, the bare minimum.
Here's an example of a residential
On 08/30/2011 02:07 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
With a patch of green grass roof (a city park):
landuse=recreation_ground
stacking=11
-1, IMHO landuse is about _land_use, so I would not tag a roof with landuse.
I'm a city dweller. We have some (and will soon have some very
We have been recently discussing on the German ML about
landuse=residential. In Germany many mappers were mapping subdivisions
/ neighbourhoods [1] with landuse=residential. This led to very rough
landuse information, because in order to keep the (sometimes quite
big) area as a whole they are
2011/8/29 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
We have been recently discussing on the German ML about
landuse=residential. In Germany many mappers were mapping subdivisions
/ neighbourhoods [1] with landuse=residential. This led to very rough
landuse information, because in order to
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
We have been recently discussing on the German ML about
landuse=residential. In Germany many mappers were mapping subdivisions
/ neighbourhoods [1] with landuse=residential. This led to very rough
landuse
Landuse is a general description of what the predominant landuse is.
Hence if a residential subdivision includes a community park or golf
course, or an industrial park includes a McDonald's, you don't need to
cut them out of the polygon.
As for including roads, I tend to include them if
On 29/08/2011 23:35, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 8/29/2011 6:05 PM, Dave F. wrote:
Mapping the difference between a
residential estate a golf course is, IMO, the bare minimum.
Here's an example of a residential community (Bay Hill) that has a
golf course within it:
24 matches
Mail list logo
