2010/5/18 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" <xific...@gmail.com>:
> M∡rtin Koppenhoefer napsal(a):
>> Thanks for putting this up. I would actually try to reduce some of it
>> to the necessary:
>> "The most common form of garden, located in proximity to a residence,
>> usually private access only. The main purpose is usually relaxation
>> activities. " - I would delete "The main purpose is usually relaxation
>> activities. " because it restricts without benefit.
>
> By this I have tried to incorporate the idea that in case of residential
> garden it doesn't really matter if you have a nice garden in the french
> style or a plain lawn.
probably you should write this there,
>> Are there any ideas how to solve the problem that this more or less
>> obsoletes leisure=park? Shall we allow the values garden:type and
>> garden:style for parks as well? This could be done by simply avoiding
>> the prefix ("type" and "style" without the garden).
>
> I have thought about that, but...
> 1) We need the prefix, so it is clear type/style of what we are tagging.
as long as you keep one object for one "thing" you don't need them. It
is clear that you describe the garden when "type" is attached to a
garden object. You don't prefix garden:name either.
> 2) It is true that leisure=park is somewhat similar to the garden, but I
> still consider a park as more or less grassy area with fewer plants, or
> at least smaller variety. And personally I don't know any area where I
> would hesitate if I should tag it as a park or garden - usually most of
> the local folks call it one way or the other and the area often has one
> of the words in its name.
One example would be the "English Garden" you can find in many cities,
and I would usually consider it a park but it fits as well 100% into
the garden description.
> 3) This could in theory incorporate many of other tags like
> landuse=allotments,vineyard,orchard etc., but I guess these are meant
> for rather large scale,
I also thought of them and found that they are really different, so
these additional tags won't fit. Independant of their size.
> and I think they should stay where they are (landuse key).
+1, they're landuses.
> I think leisure=garden should be located exclusively in
> landuse=recreation_ground, or residential (for garden:type=residential),
> maybe even landuse=allotments if anyone wants to tag each property
> separately.
? No, it is useful for castles and other representational gardens as
well. Why would you restrict it to residencial areas? I mean, at least
that would be quite a change from the current definition.
cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
