I heard back from the original mapper, Mark Newnham, about the use of the tag industrisl=well_site. He said it is clearly a mistake.
Yes, this is clearly a mistake on my part, although I believe at the time the documentation on this was pretty thin. Feel free to fix to whichever is correct Mark I can fix those tags easily (by removing them) but want to make sure I don't run afoul of the automated editing guidelines. Opinions? On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Dave Swarthout <daveswarth...@gmail.com> wrote: > > landuse=industrial is simply > > factually wrong because most of the land is not actually used for > > industrial purposes. > > I also agree. But how best to tag such areas then? > > In terms of "mapping ownership", I don't think that bears on this > conversation any more than it does when tagging an area as industrial based > on satellite imagery. The area is reserved for some future use related to > the extraction of oil. But more to the point of my original question, how > best to indicate that any particular industrial area (landuse=industrial) > is *inside* the leased, and named, tract? > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer < > dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> 2017-10-16 14:05 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de>: >> >>> On Monday 16 October 2017, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >>> > >>> > I think we don't map individual land ownership or land use rights >>> > because of privacy concerns [...] >>> >>> No, we don't map land ownership because it is usually not verifiable >>> which is partly due to privacy concerns from side of the cadastral >>> legislations. In Germany for example land ownership records are not >>> public, they may only be viewed by parties with a justified interest. >>> >>> >> >> if it isn't verifiable there's no question, but if it is verifiable >> because the border or its description was published (not the case here >> according to Dave), then we could map it. >> >> >> >> >> >>> This is of no relevance here of course, landuse=industrial is simply >>> factually wrong because most of the land is not actually used for >>> industrial purposes. >> >> >> >> +1, I agree, although landuse isn't perfectly defined on a formal level >> to exclude such tagging (e.g. by using vocabulary like "primary use of >> land", which wouldn't make it wrong here). >> >> Cheers, >> Martin >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > > > -- > Dave Swarthout > Homer, Alaska > Chiang Mai, Thailand > Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
