On 16 May 2015 at 04:27, johnw <jo...@mac.com> wrote: > > On May 15, 2015, at 8:02 PM, pmailkeey . <pmailk...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > area IS landuse - it has to be (landuse=ocean !!!!) so we get > landuse=building even. > > > > > Uhhh. *What?* This is a clear about-face on the landuse tag then. > Everywhere is clearly not a landuse. Most of the earth is not altered nor > designated nor segregated for a specific use. > > I can define an “area” of the world. But if there are no purposeful > alterations for a task, designations of purpose, nor manmade buildings and > amenities contained within…. then it is not a landuse. There is no > landuse=glacier for a reason. > Most of the ocean is “unused” by people. - they have not changed it to > have a specific purpose, nor altered the water to do a specific job - and > it’s pretty hard to have a landuse on an ocean (maybe oceanuse=fish_farm?) > That would be a great "oceanuse" tag- there are plenty of floating, > manmade, use-specific, designated-to-be fish farms around the world. > > They take up what… .01% of the ocean? the rest of the ocean has no > man-altered, segregated, designated use (besides political ones) - but > those are not “on the ground” in reality (like a fish farm or a oyster > farm). > > I have no idea where you get the notion that area=landuse. land… *used* > for a task. being a woods or a mountain or a lake is not the “job” or > “designated purpose” of the area. It just is. hence the natural= tag. > > However, the land around a school building, usually fenced in, *containing > the facility and amenities that belong to the facility and designated as > such* (pitch, walkways, parking, etc) is clearly part of the school - but > not a school building. The grounds and the building together make that > “school." > > That *land*…. designated to be *use*d by people… as a school… And which > currently is *altered from it’s natural state* … to be a school ground… > and has an *area easily defined*… as a school… should be “*landuse* > =school” > > The drinking fountain, toilets, parking, gym, and other location level > amenities are amenities of the school - and should continue to be tagged as > amenities IMO - > > or should we have a tiiiiny little 30x30cm squares marked as > landuse=drinking water? Landuse=shoe_rack? Landuse=fire_extingusher? It’s > just as asinine as landuse=glacier. > > > Which leads us to this statement: > > > So that raises the question as to whether 'landuse' adds any info value in > tags to the object being mapped. 'Building' clearly does. > > > ?????????????????????????? > > when you map out only the buildings, you get a bunch of lego bricks > spilled across the map. > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=18/36.38663/139.07087 > > Even without naming, and using only a single landuse across multiple > areas, gives a much clearer idea of what is there. > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=18/36.43627/139.04950 > > > Landuse ties them together int he way we already spatially identify them - > this is a “school” this is an “apartment complex”… This is a “university” - > > The building+landuse for individual facilities gives you so much more > together than just one by itself. > > The land and non-building amenities contained within the landuse are as > important as the building. > > And… the name=* belongs to the landuse for all larger facilities. A big > school (or mall or business complex) with many named buildings, pools, > parking, seating, pitches, walkways, and wahatnot… > > is currently amenity=school + name=FooBar School. (I feel it should be > landuse=school). same as landuse=retail name=FooBar OutDoor Mall. Or > landuse=industrial name=FooBar Works. > > No single building is actually named the name of the facility - and often > is named something else! - so the name=* for the facility doesn’t belong to > it. > > Even tiny schools. My school has two buildings. Both have the same number > of students. Which is named for the school? Neither. > > The ground has the name - out on the wall. > http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=19/36.40723/139.33257 > > The name goes on the landuse, which includes the school’s parking, bike > racks, hedges, walkways, water tanks, tress, and stairways. > > The wall around our perimeter is an an easily mapped and easily defined > area boundary. Everything inside is landuse=school - as all of those > amenities not only belong to the school, but support the operation of the > school. > > Are the parking lots around a stadium not part of the stadium? Are the > lawns, walkways, quads, and roadways not part of a business complex? What > about a hospital with multiple buildings? > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.43591/139.25348 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.40791/139.06405 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.37886/139.08038 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=16/36.3295/139.1009 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=17/36.40860/139.03317 > > Here - there are no buildings (as there are none) - but just rice fields. > Doesn’t this make the map much more understandable? All of these are > man-altered places designated for a purpose. > > *http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=19/36.43286/139.25779 > <http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/285449#map=19/36.43286/139.25779>* > > This view that the land somehow lesser than the building, or the name of a > large facility somehow belongs to a building (which one? who knows!) > instead of the land the facility occupies is subjectively wrong, > objectivity wrong, and easily disproved. > > > Please reevaluate this seriously flawed opinion. > > > Javbw > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > Thanks for the post, John.
I think the problem is the tagging method. Why does there have to be two parts to it ? Landuse=schoolgrounds is the same as schoolgrounds. Natural=forest is the same as simply forest. How about: Forest=natural ? or forest=man_made ? [=plantation or somesuch term for a human-planted forest]. landuse=school is, to the map, the same as area=school which is the same as "school" or perhaps school=primary school=secondary school=music The big point is what does 'landuse' (or 'natural') tell us that's new information ? bridge=natural would be a case where natural is giving information as it is not expected bridges to be natural. Can you find a sports pitch that's not landuse ? there's no need to have landuse=sports_pitch. And to prove my point, OSM doesn't ! we have instead leisure=sports_pitch - but it's still landuse but not tagged as such. So now, it seems OSM tags landuse on its own whims, is inconsistent; is confusing landuse=golf_course leisure+golf_course man_made=golf_course Surely all three of these are 'obvious' when referring to a golf course ? If they're not the obvious - then tag differently: golf_course=electronic. OSM tagging is not logical. Does it need to be ? no, but it would help if it was. -- Mike. @millomweb <https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction> - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property & pets* T&Cs <https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail>
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
