Vào lúc 05:45 2022-10-15, Greg Troxel đã viết:
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes:
OSM does not map illegal activity.
Taken to the extreme, perhaps, but we are talking about things that are
done in the open and clearly visible to all. Landuse, by its nature,
occurs on timescales of months
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 14/10/22 23:40, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote:
>>> In some places the local authorities have lots to do with landuse and
>>> everything to do with zoning. To the extent of taking
Oct 15, 2022, 09:51 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
> On 14/10/22 23:40, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
>> Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote:
>>>
> There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities,
>
residential+commercial. I wouldn't
On 14/10/22 23:40, Greg Troxel wrote:
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes:
On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote:
There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities,
residential+commercial. I wouldn't think residential and industrial
mixes because of noise and pollution, at leas
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote:
>>> There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities,
>> residential+commercial. I wouldn't think residential and industrial
>> mixes because of noise and pollution, at least in theory.
>> Landuse has noth
Oct 14, 2022, 09:58 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
> On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote:
>
>>> There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities,
>>> residential+commercial. I wouldn't think residential and industrial mixes
>>> because of noise and pollution, at least in theory.
>
On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote:
There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities,
residential+commercial. I wouldn't think residential and industrial mixes
because of noise and pollution, at least in theory.
Landuse has nothing to do with local authorities or zoning.
I
Oct 14, 2022, 03:31 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 13 Oct 2022, at 21:50, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
>> wrote:
>>
>> Field is landuse=farmland - also when zoned as industrial area or scheduled
>> for
>> residential construction.
>>
>
>
> interestingly not. I ne
sent from a phone
> On 13 Oct 2022, at 21:50, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> Field is landuse=farmland - also when zoned as industrial area or scheduled
> for
> residential construction.
interestingly not. I never found this particularly logical, but this situation
is landuse
Oct 13, 2022, 10:36 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
> Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 16:25 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel <> g...@lexort.com> >:
>
>> a several-acre parcel with
>> a house and some trees is still landuse=residential on all of it,
>>
>
>
> it depends, if this means a big residential garden or oth
Minh Nguyen writes:
> Vào lúc 01:45 2022-10-13, Martin Koppenhoefer đã viết:
>> Often names refer to the whole part of the settlement, but there are
>> also named contiguos, single use developments where adding the name
>> to the landuse seems to "work" (not generally, only in some
>> instances)
Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
> Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 16:25 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
>
>> Part of the issue is that landuse should more or less follow property
>> lines, unless there is some reason why not.
>
>> a several-acre parcel with
>> a house and some trees is still landuse=residentia
Nick Santos writes:
> I'd say if you think it's going to work, build it and show the community
> examples of where it works well and where it doesn't. Discussing the
> hypothetical makes us all revert to our own assumptions rather than looking
> at a real comparison. I'm personally skeptical tha
Vào lúc 01:45 2022-10-13, Martin Koppenhoefer đã viết:
Often names refer to the whole part of the settlement, but there are
also named contiguos, single use developments where adding the name to
the landuse seems to "work" (not generally, only in some instances).
The latter is especially preva
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 20:00 Uhr schrieb Evan Carroll :
>
> This is all 100% new to me. Where is it documented that a "shop" in a
> detached house should be mapped as a detached house, and not a shop?
>
please do not try to create confusion bvy shortening things. There are 2
entities to be ma
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 17:43 Uhr schrieb Evan Carroll :
> Some neighborhoods have signs with names, which is great
> because you can add value with the name.
use place=neighbourhood for these names if they are referring to something
bigger than a contiguos property. When you add names to lan
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 16:25 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
> Part of the issue is that landuse should more or less follow property
> lines, unless there is some reason why not.
I would generally agree with this
> a several-acre parcel with
> a house and some trees is still landuse=residentia
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 17:46 Uhr schrieb Evan Carroll :
> Landuse has nothing to do with local authorities or zoning.
+1
However, as-is unnamed
> developed landuse is a function of the buildings inside.
>
not necessarily, it is about the whole land that has the tag, it could also
be land
> You seem to imply this is trivial, so feel free to build a prototype of
this to see how accurate it is (note that you will need to judge the
automated method against manual mapping, not the other way around). But
most areas are probably not mapped in enough detail yet for this to work.
For exampl
Oct 12, 2022, 19:56 by m...@evancarroll.com:
>> But in some places,
>> mappers have been more rigorous about respecting each building's
>> architectural origins.
>>
>
> This is all 100% new to me. Where is it documented that a "shop" in a
> detached house should be mapped as a detached house,
On 12/10/2022 18:56, Evan Carroll wrote:
But in some places,
mappers have been more rigorous about respecting each building's
architectural origins.
This is all 100% new to me. Where is it documented that a "shop" in a
detached house should be mapped as a detached house, and not
Le 12.10.22 à 19:56, Evan Carroll a écrit :
Where is it documented that a "shop" in a detached house
should be mapped as a detached house, and not a shop?
you should have both :
the building
the user = the shop
it's documented in "one feature = one element" :)
Where is the notion of "archite
Vào lúc 10:56 2022-10-12, Evan Carroll đã viết:
But in some places,
mappers have been more rigorous about respecting each building's
architectural origins.
This is all 100% new to me. Where is it documented that a "shop" in a
detached house should be mapped as a detached house, an
>
> Verifiability is another matter
That's the matter I want to cover. I'm not concerned with the legal side of
it. My method is verifiability based on our data set. It can be proven and
can be quantified to internal consistency. How does their data set which
"consists of street-level imagery col
>
> But in some places,
> mappers have been more rigorous about respecting each building's
> architectural origins.
This is all 100% new to me. Where is it documented that a "shop" in a
detached house should be mapped as a detached house, and not a shop? Where
is the notion of "architectural ori
>
>
> The wiki is often incomplete or wrong.You are proposing a massive
> change in OSM, essentially to deprecated the concept of landuse, and I
> think very few people share that view.
>
I don't see it like that. Why do you? Nothing in the wiki on landuse
mentions property lines. That's not
Vào lúc 09:12 2022-10-12, Evan Carroll đã viết:
if you have x number of detached residences occupied by offices,
it is not a landuse=residential
Then it's mistakenly tagged. You do not use `building=detached` for
shops and offices. Per the wiki,
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag
Vào lúc 07:58 2022-10-12, Marc_marc đã viết:
Le 11.10.22 à 20:48, Andy Townsend a écrit :
That was added in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127101982 ,
I am surprised that no one is concerned about the compatibility
between its proprietary source and osm
Lyft's policy lead has clari
Evan Carroll writes:
>> Part of the issue is that landuse should more or less follow property
>> lines, unless there is some reason why not. a several-acre parcel with
>> a house and some trees is still landuse=residential on all of it, absent
>> farming or some side industrial business.
>
> Pr
>
> if you have x number of detached residences occupied by offices,
> it is not a landuse=residential
>
Then it's mistakenly tagged. You do not use `building=detached` for shops
and offices. Per the wiki,
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Ddetached
> A detached house is a free-st
Le 12.10.22 à 17:39, Evan Carroll a écrit :
If you an area with 100% detached residences inside,
it's a residential. Right? Always. No exceptions,
no :)
if you have x number of detached residences occupied by offices,
it is not a landuse=residential
it follows from the detached residences in
> There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities,
> residential+commercial. I wouldn't think residential and industrial mixes
> because of noise and pollution, at least in theory.
Landuse has nothing to do with local authorities or zoning. I've
argued it would have _more_ value if
> I do not understand 'automatically generated'. Landuse is about the
primary human use of the land, and that's something that has to be
obeserved, or come from another dataset (as an import) where it was
observed.
This is true if the landuse conveys _additional_ information, like a
name. But for
Le 12.10.22 à 07:04, Evan Carroll a écrit :
is it better to have a computer make an objective statement and tell how
you accurately the landuse tag fits?
I read your algorithm a bit quickly but I don't see how a computer is
going to be able to tell where the boundary is between residential and
Le 11.10.22 à 20:48, Andy Townsend a écrit :
That was added in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127101982 ,
I am surprised that no one is concerned about the compatibility
between its proprietary source and osm
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagg
On 11/10/2022 19:34, Evan Carroll wrote:
Some examples of these nameless sections are,
* w1101484647 by A_Prokopova_lyft
Not looked at all your examples, but i can't see a problem with your first.
It covers a large area of no just a building but car parking etc, and is
surround by landuse of
Evan Carroll writes:
> *FOLLOW UP HYPOTHETICAL: *
> I've been thinking about this a lot. I'm arguing here that,
>
> * Landuse for developed land can be better automatically generated when
> there isn't a named polygon.
> * If automatically generated, we can achieve perfect accuracy or quantify
>
You seem to imply this is trivial, so feel free to build a prototype of
this to see how accurate it is (note that you will need to judge the
automated method against manual mapping, not the other way around). But
most areas are probably not mapped in enough detail yet for this to work.
For example,
*FOLLOW UP HYPOTHETICAL: *
I've been thinking about this a lot. I'm arguing here that,
* Landuse for developed land can be better automatically generated when
there isn't a named polygon.
* If automatically generated, we can achieve perfect accuracy or quantify
the margins of errors (the degree to
>
> if there are industrial and residential buildings, they should not go into
> the same landuse.
>
This would make more sense then the current state of affairs as at least
then I could use the data for _something_ other than highlighting a map,
but alas that's not the case,
> The landuse tag is
sent from a phone
> On 12 Oct 2022, at 07:11, Evan Carroll wrote:
>
> Let's say you're in an industrial zone: do you tag as such
> (landuse=industrial) if half of the buildings have been converted to lofts?
I would see landuse=residential on the parcels where people live and
landuse=indus
Vào lúc 18:27 2022-10-11, Shawn K. Quinn đã viết:
If, like me, you want to see fewer unnamed landuse areas in your
backyard, map more named landuse areas corresponding to retail and
residential developments. These areas not only reduce the pressure to
"fill in" the map visually but also add inf
>
>
> In a retail area, if every shop is mapped precisely then the
> landuse=retail tag could possibly be inferred, in the same way that Google
> maps "area of interest" - but looking at Google you can often see mistakes
> due to missing or miscategorized shops and homes. Adding the
> landuse provi
Shawn has it right as I see it, too, so I think he says it for all of us.
Let's all say "there are regionalisms" and leave it at that (for now). Tags
can (and do) express those. It's complicated, not terribly too much.
And we tighten it up across stores (convenience or otherwise) as nodes and
On 10/11/22 19:45, Minh Nguyen wrote:
None of this is particularly relevant to Houston, but I don't think
there's any precedent or mechanism for formally deprecating a broadly
defined tag in only the places that satisfy certain criteria.
Houston has no zoning (the largest city in the US to not
Vào lúc 14:06 2022-10-11, Evan Carroll đã viết:
This is also really well said, and we should not overlook that I'm new
to OSM and don't know of the time when buildings were not mapped. I see
all buildings mapped, and wonder why I need a container to tell me that
all things in it are that which
Andy Townsend writes:
> I'd suggest asking them in the changeset about that edit, including
> where they got the data from. I'd also be perfectly reasonable to ask
> them what the "proprietary sources" were that they used,
Agreed. It would be more than reasonable to ask them about the
propri
Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
> Actually I do not believe “commercial zone” is a good description of
> landuse=commercial because it implies zoning (prescription, also
> planning i.e. permissible future landuse as opposed to de facto use of
> land) and because it implies a certain scale.
I think
You are using "zone" and that confuses me, because in the US zone is
like zoning.
Are we talking about landuse, or regulations for what land can be used
for?
I think it's reasonable to draw landuse=retail if
it's actually true
it's named and the boundary is more or less the property lines
Re: "not to convey (additional) information"
No, it is useful information.
A human who knows the local area can pretty easily determine which blocks
or streets are retail or industrial. This can be done even if you do not
know the exact names of the buildings or businesses - sometimes in an
indus
>
>
> I disagree. People may not always agree about the relative usefulness of
> some types of data, but someone advocating for some data to be added to
> OSM should really be able to explain why they find it useful.
>
> That's all I plan to say on this side remark because it's not really
> applica
Thanks Joseph Eisenberg! That's exactly what I'm looking for. Good answer.
So basically the primary use case of an **unnamed** residential,
commercial, industrial, and retail "Zones" is not to convey (additional)
information but to serve as a good-enough styling solution about what the
zone convey
sent from a phone
> On 11 Oct 2022, at 21:45, Evan Carroll wrote:
>
> If there is no name, what is the value?
it is a property that helps understanding how an area is structured. If there
is a name you should use “place”
Cheers Martin
___
Tagging
sent from a phone
> On 11 Oct 2022, at 21:45, Evan Carroll wrote:
>
> No value. There is no reason to call neighboring w1101484649 "Commercial
> Zone". Why is a car wash and a vet commercial, and the gas station is retail?
this seems completely in line with what I would expect for “landuse”
On 11.10.22 21:51 Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
Oct 11, 2022, 21:42 by m...@evancarroll.com:
I just don't see the value even if everything was done right.
That is simply utterly irrelevant.
I disagree. People may not always agree about the relative usefulness of
some types of data, but someon
Oct 11, 2022, 22:12 by m...@evancarroll.com:
>>> I just don't see the value even if everything was done right.
>>>
>> That is simply utterly irrelevant. Even if you do not see value of mapping
>> area:highway=* or shops or detail of individual trees or opening hours
>> or bicycle parkings or l
>
> I just don't see the value even if everything was done right.
>
> That is simply utterly irrelevant. Even if you do not see value of mapping
> area:highway=* or shops or detail of individual trees or opening hours
> or bicycle parkings or landuse or glaciers or anything else, then it is
> still
" when there is no key on the zone what does the zone convey?"
It conveys that the area of land is primarily used for selling goods
(landuse=retail).
This is useful because retail areas, which include shops and restaurants,
are high-traffic destinations, which many map users will be interested in
Oct 11, 2022, 21:28 by cliff...@snowandsnow.us:
> As Andy suggested, contact the mapper with your concerns. I've have had good
> luck dealing with Lyft in the past and appreciate their edits in my area.
>
Though note that it appears that this Lyft mapping is 100% fine and done as
expected.
I w
That they exist isn't the question. I acknowledged this. It doesn't make
sense why they should. The reason farmland exists is,
* The presence of land alone is not mappable, IE., farmland unlike
Commercial and Retail Zones can not be inferred by buildings.
* Farmland gives you the ability to add na
Oct 11, 2022, 21:42 by m...@evancarroll.com:
> I just don't see the value even if everything was done right.
>
That is simply utterly irrelevant. Even if you do not see value of mapping
area:highway=* or shops or detail of individual trees or opening hours
or bicycle parkings or landuse or glacie
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 2:17 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> Oct 11, 2022, 20:34 by m...@evancarroll.com:
>
> these polygons don't add any value: they're not describing what things
> are, and they're frequently incorrect
>
> You mentioned https://www.opens
I agree with Mateusz.
* landuse=retail,residential,industrial, etc. are not bound to the North
American concept of zoning.
* landuse=retail does correctly not encompass the veterinarian, because
a vet mostly sells services, not goods. It is thus correct that the vet
is in a landuse=commercia
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 12:05 PM Evan Carroll wrote:
>
> For all of these cases, when "Zone" isn't established by law I see no
> value. I think this would be a good place to start. But I'm also interested
> in knowing Lyft's motivations behinds these Zones and I assume they're on
> the list or so
Oct 11, 2022, 20:34 by m...@evancarroll.com:
> these polygons don't add any value: they're not describing what things are,
> and they're frequently incorrect
>
You mentioned https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1101484647
Why it is supposed to be wrong? Are there additional objects not mapped in
For the purposes of steering the convo, I think a better question as it
relates to this list is the more general:
* If there is one Commercial Building in an unnamed Commercial Zone: what
value is there for a user?
* If there are two Commercial Buildings in an unnamed Commercial Zone: what
value i
On 11/10/2022 19:34, Evan Carroll wrote:
Some examples of these nameless sections are,
* w1101484647 by A_Prokopova_lyft
That was added in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127101982 ,
which was that user's first edit in OSM.
I'd suggest asking them in the changeset about that edit, i
67 matches
Mail list logo
