Colin, do you have your own preferred style for how to tag a named housing estate in a city for example? I use landuse=residential for this (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51736709 though that one wasn't by me) and I feel it a very appropriate style. It can easily be carved out of a larger resi area if needed, and I'm not aware of any drawback of that.
Cheers Dan 2017-01-17 13:44 GMT+00:00 Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl>: > Can't think of any justification for name on landuse. The boundary of a > village may be co-linear with the built-up area, so the "place" boundary may > be co-linear with the "landuse=residential", but they are not the same > object and should not be conflated into a single OSM object from some > (misguided?) principle of saving space in the database or whatever. > > > > //colin > > On 2017-01-17 14:33, Andrew Hain wrote: > > A recent changeset in southwest London > [https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43807789] added names to > landuse=residential and landuse=commercial polygons. The mapper has not > responded to the changeset comment that I left some weeks ago. The names > themselves read more like descriptions to me as a local and they were added > to the existing polygons, which are somewhat arbitrary (you could micromap > with a polygon for each block omitting all roads). These names appear on > OSM-carto in italics. > > What is a general view on when it makes sense to add a name to a landuse > polygon? > > -- > Andrew > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
