I just discovered by accident that this system cuts content from contributions sent by email.
What and who is affected by this issue/request?
I hope not so many are affected
How do we replicate the issue?
I sent this email:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2023 22:49:45 +0100
References: <discourse/post/995720@community.openstreetmap.org>
In-Reply-To: <discourse/post/995720@community.openstreetmap.org>
Message-ID: <CABPTjTAN5K-PcvVGuM=ieEAi2N2QZOOPuHYcVatpKPWRRdsu5w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [General talk/Tagging general discussion] Small scale landuse=industrial vs. industrial=*
From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist@gmail.com>
To: OpenStreetMap Community Forum <replies+5769648a6a3a821a9bd61fd0003c06f6@community.openstreetmap.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a89c29060cbb9c9f"
--000000000000a89c29060cbb9c9f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Am So., 17. Dez. 2023 um 20:46 Uhr schrieb Mikke via OpenStreetMap
Community Forum <community@noreply.openstreetmap.org>:
>
>
> And shall we use landuse=industrial preferably large scale (whole area) or
> small scale (single premises)?
>
from my understanding, we do not have any way to tag "large scale" without
conflicting with the rest of the map, which is always small scale.
Ultimately you have to draw a precise line to create a polygon, and it will
interact with all the other polygons that are already there. Having a
landuse cutting halfway through a building or other polygon is not a
desirable situation (although it is done on purpose). From a German or
Italian perspective, permitted landuse is assigned to building plots (or
sometimes even parts of them), this is the common scale for the usage of
land. If you agree that the streets are a different landuse than the plots
along it, then the scale already gets down to block size even without
looking at individual plots.
For fractions of settlements, we should use the place structure, IMHO. The
predominant landuse is implicit if you draw the place entity (suburb,
quarter, neighbourhood) as a polygon (rather than as a node which would
leave a big questionmark regarding extent / boundaries) and actual landuses
within are tagged accordingly, but the scheme could also be extended by
having a mapper classify the type, e.g. quarter=industrial, or
place:type=industrial or something like this.
--000000000000a89c29060cbb9c9f
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail=
_attr">Am So., 17. Dez. 2023 um 20:46=C2=A0Uhr schrieb Mikke via OpenStreet=
Map Community Forum <<a href=3D"mailto:community@noreply.openstreetmap.o=
rg">community@noreply.openstreetmap.org</a>>:<br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rg=
b(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
<div style=3D"line-height:1.4;text-align:left" dir=3D"ltr">
=20
=20
=20
<div>
<div></div>
<div style=3D"margin-bottom:25px">
<table cellspacing=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" border=3D"0">
<tbody><tr>
<td style=3D"vertical-align:top;width:55px">
<br></td><td><br></td></tr></tbody></table><div style=3D"padding-to=
p:5px"><p style=3D"margin-top:0px;border:0px">And shall we use landuse=3Din=
dustrial preferably large scale (whole area) or small scale (single premise=
s)?</p></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div><br><=
/div><div>from my understanding, we do not have any way to tag "large =
scale" without conflicting with the rest of the map, which is always s=
mall scale. Ultimately you have to draw a precise line to create a polygon,=
and it will interact with all the other polygons that are already there. H=
aving a landuse cutting halfway through a building or other polygon is not =
a desirable situation (although it is done on purpose). From a German or It=
alian perspective, permitted landuse is assigned to building plots (or some=
times even parts of them), this is the common scale for the usage of land. =
If you agree that the streets are a different landuse than the plots along =
it, then the scale already gets down to block size even without looking at =
individual plots.<br></div><div><br></div><div>For fractions of settlements=
, we should use the place structure, IMHO. The predominant landuse is impli=
cit if you draw the place entity (suburb, quarter, neighbourhood) as a poly=
gon (rather than as a node which would leave a big questionmark regarding e=
xtent / boundaries) and actual landuses within are tagged accordingly, but =
the scheme could also be extended by having a mapper classify the type, e.g=
. quarter=3Dindustrial, or place:type=3Dindustrial or something like this.<=
br></div></div>
--000000000000a89c29060cbb9c9f--
Expected behavior (i.e. solution)
the message should have been posted
Other Comments
Instead, only the second paragraph was posted, and I added the rest manually after discovering it was incomplete. The part that was posted without my intervention was this:
For fractions of settlements, we should use the place structure, IMHO. The predominant landuse is implicit if you draw the place entity (suburb, quarter, neighbourhood) as a polygon (rather than as a node which would leave a big questionmark regarding extent / boundaries) and actual landuses within are tagged accordingly, but the scheme could also be extended by having a mapper classify the type, e.g. quarter=industrial, or place:type=industrial or something like this.