sent from a phone
>> On 29. Mar 2020, at 18:24, Greg Troxel <[email protected]> wrote: > Really, it seems like > you are trying to shoehorn european definitions into US naming when it > is just not the way it is. Frankly, I am not really familiar with the situation in North America (besides some lessons about North American urbanism I have heard 20 years ago). I am aware there are some developments that imitate 19th century architecture, so even if many or most of the traditional city centers have been razed in the sixties, I would still expect to find at least some squares in north america. If you have a look at the wikipedia article on Times Square, it also mentions its nature as a town square: “ Times Square functions as a town square” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Times_Square It is also a model example in that it lies at the junction of import streets and is emphasized by the adjacent architecture. The existence of squares is not a recent or European invention, for example you’ll find squares in arabic or Chinese cities as well (you’ll indeed find them almost everywhere), here’s a list of some famous squares worldwide: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_city_squares Supposedly we would not want to have different specific top level place tags for neighbourhoods, depending on name components, so using place=square for neighborhoods seems not a sensible interpretation of the tag, I guess we can agree on this? Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
