Jean-Marc Liotier <j...@liotier.org> writes: > On 3/23/19 5:28 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> Jean-Marc Liotier <j...@liotier.org> writes: >>> So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the >> I don't understand why you think landuse=religious shouldn't be >> present. It seems that all land used for religious purposes should >> have that tag > > Redundancy ? I have the same issue for shop=* (or even amenity=fuel) > also tagged with landuse=retail - same sort of redundancy. > > To me, amenity=place of worship is implicitly landuse=religious and > shop=* is implicitly landuse=retail... Am I alone in thinking that way?
You are surely not alone :-) I see having landuse as consistency, so that data consumers understanding landuse can do so, without having a vast array of implicit rules. As for shop/fuel, I prefer shop etc. tags on the individual places, and landuse=retail on the entire land area that is in use for that sort of thing (including parking - the whole group of parcels). That extent of area cannot be inferred from the other tags. I find the implicit rules really problematic, as we don't have a machine-readable repository of them that can be used to processs tags as they are to the full logical set of what they mean. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging