2015-03-05 1:14 GMT+01:00 stevea <[email protected]>: > What I understand Martin Koppenhoefer to say are essentially the same > things, but I'm not sure if he understands (or agrees) with Escondido > having large areas marked as landuse=residential. These are not simply > zoned residential (they are), they ARE (on-the-ground verifiable) > residential. So it is OK for them to be tagged as they are.
Yes, I'm saying the same things. In particular, if you ask me about these huge landuse polygons in Escondido, I don't particularily like them. I like detailed mapping, and I believe as soon as someone starts to map the details he'll have to split these polygons into smaller ones in order to keep maintainability. I don't suggest to make them multipolygons and to exclude stuff, this would become a nightmare very soon. I would exclude (at least) the main arterial roads from the residential landuse and also stuff like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65592897 And when you did this, you'd already have it all split into much smaller landuse areas. Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
