2010/5/16 Zeke Farwell <ezeki...@gmail.com>: > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 10:29 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> IMHO yes, as natural is mainly about landcover (what you physically >> encounter on the spot) while landuse is about usage. > > If you want do some extremely detailed mapping you might make a lot of > different non-overlapping polygons that represent what's on the ground > "exactly". However, I don't think that is really necessary or even > "correct". If there is a large residential area with some chunks of woods > inside it should those chunks of woods not be considered residential land?
I'm not sure whether to consider the wood residential land, after all that depends on the concrete situation, but I think that this is exactly what I wrote about: you could simply tag in a first approximasation the whole area as landuse=residential and at the same time draw the wood-polygon as landcover=wood (or natural=wood, or whatever). cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
