On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM, johnw <jo...@mac.com> wrote: > Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is > up for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t. > > I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse > - eg: we have residential/ retail/ industrial/ commericial - and hundreds > of different tags to properly define the the buildings that would fall into > these 4 land uses. > > I believe there is a good case for landuse=civic (name matches > building=civic) to cover the basic landuse of a myriad of > public/civic/institutional/state services that could be tagged with more > specific amenity tags, or a new civic=• subtag - either through point > markers, building labels, or on the area with the landuse. > > Let the landuse denote class, and the other tags take care of the detail. > just like with residential / commercial / retail / industrial. > > if you want to slice out a service (eg, school, hospital, airport), > that’s fine - but I think there is enough leftover to warrant another broad > landuse class. >
I just noticed that my local government uses "public" for these types of landuse. That seems like a appropriate land use for most of the usages described. Civic refers to the duties of people associated with their governments. Public refers to being "open" as in the lands and buildings. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
