Many separate areas tagged as Residential Area instead of buildings

Take a look at

Is this acceptable practice or subject for correction?

Hi, it seems to me a very rough first mapping of residential information. It is not wrong per se. Of course, next steps should refine the border of the residential areas excluding forest, etc. and then of course buildings should be mapped (residential areas and buildings are obviously not mutually exclusive, indeed mapping should be done for both)

This was mapped during a specific HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team) mapping task which asked the contributors to do the following:

I suppose you could use the existence of the residential areas to search for buildings to map. There may have been follow up mapping tasks to draw in the missing buildings. But generally you can map what you want anytime.

In this case I would suggest either just mapping the buildings/improving the shapes or trying to find a better solution with the local community concerning the mapping of "purok"s and "sitio"s in a different way if you find it unsuitable.

It’d probably be worth commenting on a changeset (in a language the mapper is likely to understand) and politely explain that the instruction was “Identify groups of at least 3 houses”.