On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Cartinus wrote:
> I don't know about documentation, but it is in the list of presets in JOSM.
>
Yeah, I find this situation very weird. It seems there are four places to
check when considering whether a tag exists:
1) The wiki (where it could be in the Map Feature
2009/11/30 Cartinus
> I would actually
> prefer natural=meadow for the last, but since the preset in JOSM doesn't
> show
> what key is used for meadow, both natural and agricultural meadows are
> tagged
> with the same tag by a lot of people.
Of course it is shown in JOSM: just have a look at t
On Monday 30 November 2009 18:23:33 Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:12 AM, Cartinus wrote:
> > Map what you can verify:
> > * Often these are expanses of grass with the occasional bush ->
> > landuse=grass
>
> Not to be a pain, but that doesn't exist (or isn't documented).
> landus
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:12 AM, Cartinus wrote:
> Map what you can verify:
> * Often these are expanses of grass with the occasional bush ->
> landuse=grass
>
Not to be a pain, but that doesn't exist (or isn't documented).
landuse=meadow I guess. That would actually satisfy a lot of my needs.
On Monday 30 November 2009 15:24:02 Steve Bennett wrote:
> Incidentally, what's the best way to map "nothing". Big, empty blocks on
> the fringes of the city. Again, I want to distinguish between unmapped and
> unoccupied. Some of them may be farms/agistment, some may be "greenfield",
> some might
2009/11/30 Ed Avis
>
> A house would be building=yes or perhaps building=house. But for a block
> or a
> larger area, yes, tagging the landuse is fine.
>
I'd suggest to tag detached house differently from terraced houses and other
typologies, e.g. building=detached (currently 1425 uses accordin
Steve Bennett gmail.com> writes:
>>I don't quite understand what you mean; if there is 'something' then why not
>>just map that something?
>
>Heh, because I don't know what it is! It's often hard to tell the difference
>between a large rural property, a farm, or even some kind of light industry.
Steve Bennett wrote:
> Slightly related note, is it ok to use tags like "landuse=residential"
> at vastly different levels of granularity. Ie, it could be a house, a
> block, or what I've been doing at the moment, whole suburbs.
People certainly do use landuse=residential like this, so I wouldn
Incidentally, what's the best way to map "nothing". Big, empty blocks on the
fringes of the city. Again, I want to distinguish between unmapped and
unoccupied. Some of them may be farms/agistment, some may be "greenfield",
some might be crown land, some might be owned but unoccupied.
(Or maybe I w
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Ed Avis wrote:
> Steve Bennett gmail.com> writes:
>
> >1) After tagging a building, I want to define the property boundary
> >that the building sits in. In some cases, there's a landuse tag
> >(landuse=commercial, residential), but how to tag a non-profit bowling
2009/11/30 Ed Avis
> >2) Sometimes there is one occupied block in the middle of large areas
> >of nothingness. I want to tag the block to show that there is
> >something there - ie, it's not unmapped.
>
> I don't quite understand what you mean; if there is 'something' then why
> not
> just map th
Steve Bennett gmail.com> writes:
>1) After tagging a building, I want to define the property boundary
>that the building sits in. In some cases, there's a landuse tag
>(landuse=commercial, residential), but how to tag a non-profit bowling
>club, a school, ...? Do you simply tag it amenity=school?
I have a couple of recurrent scenarios:
1) After tagging a building, I want to define the property boundary
that the building sits in. In some cases, there's a landuse tag
(landuse=commercial, residential), but how to tag a non-profit bowling
club, a school, ...? Do you simply tag it amenity=school
13 matches
Mail list logo
