Hello all,
I would like to do some work on Landuse in the wiki - if that is seen as helpful.
I want to clarify the point on Landuse polygons (either as polygons or as relations) sharing nodes with Highway ways and have a couple of questions:
- Are there any benefits to this method?
- Can/should this in someway be removed/deprecated?
I am aware that it is common practice (and indeed recommended https://learnosm.org/en/coordination/remote-tracing/#%3Ca-name=%22residential-howto%22%3E%3C/a%3E-landuse=residential—how-to-map) in OSM to draw large landuse=residential polygons around entire villages/neighbourhoods. I have contributed to MissingMaps and understand the initial benefits this has.
However, as mapping of an area becomes more detailed these large areas have to be broken down to accommodate other landuse / amenity / leisure tags. Given that OSM typically includes detail to the level of individual building outlines is there any good reason why landuse polygons should extend to the centrelines of highways as suggested on this page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_landuse? It seems a truism that land that is dedicated to highway (carriageway and pavement/sidewalk) is not land available for residential (or any other use). If people are expected to draw a polygon around land used for a school following the school’s boundary why shouldn’t they draw a polygon around land used for residential following the boundary of land that actually is residential?
I am aware that the landuse=highway tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dhighway is not recommended and leaving highway land untagged seems a reasonable compromise.
On a purely practical point, editing landuse areas made up of relations of fragments of highway ways is complicated (even for relatively experienced mappers) and carries a high risk of damaging not only the landuse areas but also the highway network. Removing the suggestion of linking landuse areas to highway centrelines would seem to me to make mapping both simpler and more accurate. Is there any reason not to do this?
Apologies for the long post, if there are better places for this discussion please let me know.
Nick