Landuse is a bit tricky in OSM because it has a large part of subjectivity. The residential/retail/commercial/industrial split is a common issue. How wide does a street need to be before we stop including it in the landuse ? How all-encompassing should landuse=farmland be ? Should we have lots of single-house landuse=residential in the countryside ? What's up with landuse=forest vs natural=wood ? Should I start using a multipolygon or stay with shared-nodes closed-ways for now ? These existential questions explain why landuse in OSM is just ok-ish.
FWIW, I tend to trace buildings first and landuse later (though sometimes I lose patience). Having a landuse=residential polygon double as a place=locality/neighbourhood is great when you can. I stoped worrying about spliting residential/retail exactly right. For better or worse, the townlands project is making Ireland multipolygon-heavy, so I hesitate less than I used to about using MPs. Most of our landuse=farmland has apparently been mapped by single-contribution landowners and is often of poor quality, but so far I only bother improving it when it interferes with the rest. I adopted the POV that landuse=forest means forestry activity and implies natural=wood when nothing else is tagged. _______________________________________________ Talk-ie mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
