On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Richard Mann <[email protected]> wrote: > Rather than having a bot go round making the data more complicated (and in > the case of very large lakes with lots of islands, and ponds on those > islands, it would be very, very complicated), surely it is better to have a > table available somewhere for people to go look up whether a polygon has > multiple landuses, which landuse is innermost, and what polygons it's > inside.
I wouldn't say "surely". It all depends on your target audience. Personally, I say the world is complicated, and accuracy trumps simplicity. But if that's not the direction OSM decides to go in, that's fine, it's all under a free content license, after all. On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 6:21 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/10/15 Anthony <[email protected]>: >> "School" and "lake" are not landuses though, are they? > > might be, but you'll surely find 2 landuses (as used in OSM) on the same > place. Such land is generally designated as "mixed use", or perhaps "mixed use X", where X is the primary use of the land. I suppose in some situations (apartments over top of retail shops) mapping two landuses on the same physical area can be appropriate. But that's much more rare than what we see in OSM today (it's also a good reason why a completely automated solution won't work). I missed your parenthetical of "as used in OSM", though. "As used in OSM", currently, is wrong. It may be good enough for Mapnik and Osmarender, but I thought we were making data for general use, and not just for Mapnik and Osmarender. >> I'm not even sure "forest" is a proper "landuse" tag. I guess if it's >> meant to mean "tree farm" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_farm). >> But most "forest" areas aren't "tree farms", they're "natural=wood". > > no. Don't know how you handle this in France, but in Germany and Italy > most forests are landuse=forest and natural=wood is used only in rare > cases (really and totally unmanaged forests). Read wiki and various > discussions about this ever actual topic ;-) Once again, I wasn't referring to de facto use, I was referring to how the data ought to be organized. "Forest" is not a land use. A "forest" can be used for lots of different things. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
