Re: [HOT] Quick question on village mapping

[Pete Masters]

Very interesting...

Thanks all for your help, as always!

Pete

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Blake Girardot 
wrote:

> I like to explain it in terms of land usage, people reside here on the
> land in some way, therefore landuse=residential that is how it works
> best in my experience. Fits fully within local mapping partners and
> people and is well understood HOT/OSM usage. It also works well for
> revisions in the future. It is the most general
> people-reside-on-the-land tagging and can be refined with more detail
> and specificity in the future without being incorrect now or losing
> any of the history of the original object.
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Russell Deffner
>  wrote:
> > Ah, but actual village/place boundaries can't really be determined via
> imagery; so we 'traditionally' mark areas that look residential/lived in
> with landuse=residential and handle any place boundaries with import, etc.
> > =Russ
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 4:54 PM
> > To: hot@openstreetmap.org
> > Subject: Re: [HOT] Quick question on village mapping
> >
> > On 10/28/2015 2:53 AM, Pete Masters wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> If you are adding field data to an existing shape
> >> (landuse=residential), would you tag the shape as place=village /
> >> name=whatever or would you add a node and tag the node.
> >>
> >> I've generally done the latter, but am seeing quite a few villages in
> >> Chad that conform to the former.
> >
> > landuse is not for mapping places, but land usage. If you want to show
> > the extents of a village, use a place polygon. If the extents of the two
> > are the same, you could put them both on the same object.
> >
> > ___
> > HOT mailing list
> > HOT@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> >
> >
> > ___
> > HOT mailing list
> > HOT@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>



-- 
*Pete Masters*
Missing Maps Project Coordinator
+44 7921 781 518

missingmaps.org <http://www.missingmaps.org/>

*@pedrito1414* <https://twitter.com/TheMissingMaps>
*@theMissingMaps* <https://twitter.com/TheMissingMaps>
*facebook.com/MissingMapsProject*
<https://www.facebook.com/MissingMapsProject>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Quick question on village mapping

[Blake Girardot]

I like to explain it in terms of land usage, people reside here on the
land in some way, therefore landuse=residential that is how it works
best in my experience. Fits fully within local mapping partners and
people and is well understood HOT/OSM usage. It also works well for
revisions in the future. It is the most general
people-reside-on-the-land tagging and can be refined with more detail
and specificity in the future without being incorrect now or losing
any of the history of the original object.

Cheers,
Blake

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Russell Deffner
 wrote:
> Ah, but actual village/place boundaries can't really be determined via 
> imagery; so we 'traditionally' mark areas that look residential/lived in with 
> landuse=residential and handle any place boundaries with import, etc.
> =Russ
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 4:54 PM
> To: hot@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [HOT] Quick question on village mapping
>
> On 10/28/2015 2:53 AM, Pete Masters wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> If you are adding field data to an existing shape
>> (landuse=residential), would you tag the shape as place=village /
>> name=whatever or would you add a node and tag the node.
>>
>> I've generally done the latter, but am seeing quite a few villages in
>> Chad that conform to the former.
>
> landuse is not for mapping places, but land usage. If you want to show
> the extents of a village, use a place polygon. If the extents of the two
> are the same, you could put them both on the same object.
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Quick question on village mapping

[Russell Deffner]

Ah, but actual village/place boundaries can't really be determined via imagery; 
so we 'traditionally' mark areas that look residential/lived in with 
landuse=residential and handle any place boundaries with import, etc.
=Russ

-Original Message-
From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 4:54 PM
To: hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [HOT] Quick question on village mapping

On 10/28/2015 2:53 AM, Pete Masters wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> If you are adding field data to an existing shape 
> (landuse=residential), would you tag the shape as place=village / 
> name=whatever or would you add a node and tag the node.
>
> I've generally done the latter, but am seeing quite a few villages in 
> Chad that conform to the former.

landuse is not for mapping places, but land usage. If you want to show 
the extents of a village, use a place polygon. If the extents of the two 
are the same, you could put them both on the same object.

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Quick question on village mapping

[Paul Norman]

On 10/28/2015 2:53 AM, Pete Masters wrote:

Hi all,

If you are adding field data to an existing shape 
(landuse=residential), would you tag the shape as place=village / 
name=whatever or would you add a node and tag the node.


I've generally done the latter, but am seeing quite a few villages in 
Chad that conform to the former.


landuse is not for mapping places, but land usage. If you want to show 
the extents of a village, use a place polygon. If the extents of the two 
are the same, you could put them both on the same object.


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Quick question on village mapping

[Andrew Buck]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I usually go with a node just because it is a bit more resilliant in
case of odd situations.  For example a town/village that is multiple
clusters of buildings separated by a river or some other feature.  For
these a node is the only option unless you want to multipolygon the areas.

As for putting it on the area, it does make it a bit easier to
calculate the size of the village in something like GIS software,
however assosciating the nodes/areas is a simple spatial query anyway
so I think the node still probably makes more sense.

- -AndrewBuck


On 10/28/2015 04:53 AM, Pete Masters wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> If you are adding field data to an existing shape
> (landuse=residential), would you tag the shape as place=village /
> name=whatever or would you add a node and tag the node.
> 
> I've generally done the latter, but am seeing quite a few villages
> in Chad that conform to the former.
> 
> Is there a best practice here?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Pete
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___ HOT mailing list 
> HOT@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
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=qZ21
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

[HOT] Quick question on village mapping

[Pete Masters]

Hi all,

If you are adding field data to an existing shape (landuse=residential),
would you tag the shape as place=village / name=whatever or would you add a
node and tag the node.

I've generally done the latter, but am seeing quite a few villages in Chad
that conform to the former.

Is there a best practice here?

Cheers,

Pete


-- 
*Pete Masters*
Missing Maps Project Coordinator
+44 7921 781 518

missingmaps.org 

*@pedrito1414* 
*@theMissingMaps* 
*facebook.com/MissingMapsProject*

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot