you misread that. because if its imprecise definition, there are still heated discussions on how detailed landuses should be mapped. some leave out the areas of the streets, some don't. all i wanted to state out is, that this isn't a part of the area:highway proposal. if you want to draw it over landuses you can do so, but if you are part of the other fraction you can connect it to landuses. I'm not taking sides with this proposal.
flaimo > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 13:58:45 +0200 > From: M?rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > <tagging@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - area:highway > Message-ID: <BANLkTinvTUt=mfrjeark75q+h5qwmr0...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > 2011/5/11 Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com>: >> The proposal makes reference to landuse, in particular stating that one >> might cut off adjacent landuses at its border. But the two positions on >> landuse are that it shouldn't be cut or that it should be cut at the >> right-of-way line, not at the edge of the roadway. > > > +1, you're right > I overlooked this. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
