Jun 3, 2020, 06:09 by stevea...@softworkers.com: > Mateusz Konieczny writes: > "OSM is not a place to map property rights. And landuse=residential is > certainly not a tool for mapping boundaries of owned areas or property right > boundaries." > > I don't wish to start an argument, and I ask with all the politeness I can > muster, but Mateusz, how can you be so sure? Quoting our wiki, "land > use...describes what an area of land is used for e.g. housing..., etc." On > the land that property owners own, and live on, can you truly say they are > not "using the entirety of their land for residential purposes?" Of course, > some of that might have a house or apartment building, but the rest of it, is > that land not also residential? > Depends on a case. If you have a tree-covered area next to house, then it is likely a landuse=residential and it likely terminates where your owned area terminates. But if you have 2000 acres of forest, wetland and whatever else - with your house there, it does not mean that the entire area becomes landuse=residential. I agree that landuse=residential often matches property area (as people typically use their entire property). But I would strongly against matching residential areas to property boundaries. And I am strongly opposed to basing OSM mapping on people who think that landuse=residential mapped in OSM defines their owned property and affects their legal rights. > "the remainder of land which is used for residential purposes which does > not strictly contain the footprint of a building (hut, apartment, tent, > hogan, mud daub dwelling)?" Something other than residential? It is > residential! > Yes, this is residential. But I have seen cases (and though that you are talking about it) of people tagging private forest/wetland/whatever as landuse=residential till their property boundary For example things like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lush_undergrowth_Bj%C3%B6rnlandet_national_park.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lawthorn_wetland,_Irvine,_North_Ayrshire.jpg were marked as landuse=residential solely because were on the same legal area as a house, despite not used for residential purpose in any way (except some sightseeing/walking, like it happens with any other forest). For example, area should not be marked as landuse=industrial just because someone has legal rights to drill for oil there or legal rights to build factory there. It also is not landuse=industrial if it is forest next to currently operating factory, with a planned construction there. Only once a construction starts it can be marked as a landuse=construction and later once the factory is actually there it will be a landuse=industrial
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
