2010/9/27 Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>: > It seems to me that landuse is a mess.
+1 > landuse=agricultural would include values like farm and vineyard does this include farmyards, or would they be residential or industrial? What if they also sell to end customers? > landuse=institutional would include values like military and cemetery, > as well as schools Why is cemetary institutional? Institutional is very difficult IMHO, what about a farming cooperative? Aren't they institutional as well? By looking at your examples on your user page more problems arise. > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:NE2/landuse honestly, I don't see why this would improve the situation. You are changing mainly words but there are no (t yet) solutions for differentiations like density, mixed use (what is generally the predominant landuse in the centre of a city in good old Europe, and where I refuse to reduce it to "commercial"). E.g. why should recycling and landfill be in the same category as hospitals, embassies or prisons? Also please don't confuse "place of worship" and churches / church property. ___ First thing I'd like to clearify is the intention of the landuse tag. In urban planning landuse usually refers to a generalisation of predominant activities / landuse in an area. In OSM we (some) tend to do this more detailed (every lot, or even part of sites/lots). I prefer the detailed approach, because it permits to create generalised bigger entities automatically (probably very difficult if you want to make it good, would require elaborate rules what to mix and what not). This is land_use_ The other tag we probably are still missing is land_cover_. (There is something in natural for instance, personally I already use landcover for some things, like landcover=tree because they aren't all landuse=forest). cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
