Maybe it's just me, but I really can't understand why landuse for
government functions needs its own tagging. The buildings are often
indistinguishable from commercial properties - what is different is that
the occupier is some statutory organisation. We don't tag
landuse=charity, or landuse=private, or landuse=education, so why
landuse=civic_admin? If you want to know who the tenant of a certain
building is, let's have tenant=City of Blah and allow this for any
building (or campus). Same arguments against landuse=religious. Why
should farm be tagged as landuse=religious instead of landuse=farmland
just because it is run by monks? Land use is the use a piece of land is
put to, and not WHO is doing the using or WHY they are doing it. If we
want to record those other dimensions, use different tags instead of
further complicating the landuse mess.
On 2018-09-20 08:25, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 20/09/18 03:57, John Willis wrote:
>
>> ... Retail is always wrong. Commercial is a crutch.
>
> In your part of the world, perhaps. Elsewhere, this isn't guaranteed to be
> the case. Certainly here in the UK many formerly "civic" services have been
> privatised and are run for out-and-out commercial gain; others are run as
> commercial entities owned by the government or non-governmental third sector
> organisations. What this means is that people will need to pick the landuse
> that works best for them in their local area - to say that something is
> "always wrong" is, in OSM, almost always wrong(!).
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
