Changeset: 33894719
Created Farmland multipolygon between Bristol and Bath. Single changeset, revert if problematic
Closed by mdt3k
Tags
created_by | JOSM/1.5 (8677 en_GB) |
---|---|
source | Bing |
Discussion
-
Comment from DaveF
Hi mdt3k
Could you explain in more detail what you've done generally, & specifically the Kelston & Swinford relations?If changesets are problematic the creators needs to correct their own errors & revert them.
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5494099#map=19/51.42139/-2.44548 certainly looks a bit problematic, in that there seems to be an unfeasibly thin bit of the natural=wood to the east of the stream. I'd suggest that it doesn't make sense to use a multipolygon for this area of woodland at all - it just looks on the imagery like one area. If there's a choice between using a multipolygon to represent something and not using a multipolygon, using a multipolygon is almost always the wrong answer for all sorts of reasons, including ease of maintainability going forward.
-
Comment from mdt3k
Hi,
Thanks for the feedback. My intent was to map the farmland in the area between the A420 and the A431. Rather than create a new area/way by tracing along the outlines of the roads, existing residential landuses etc., I opted to create a multipolygon, re-using existing of ways as required. In some places this required existing land-use ways to be split (and a multipolygon created). I accept this complexity is bad.
Doing this was far more problematic than I anticipated, and required a number of existing land-uses to be converted into multipolygons. This is what's happened at Kelston and Swineford, so that the "farm-side" of the residential land use way could be re-used (as the edge of the farm multipolygon). The picnic area at Swineford (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5494099#map=19/51.42139/-2.44548 ) was particularly problematic, but the intent was the same - use the edge of the wood as the limit for the farmland multipolygon. I will revisit it and tidy it up.
As neither of the options I'd identified seemed particularly good for mapping the farm land use (which is undeniably present). I'm open to suggestions, and happy to revert this change and attempt the other option.
The options in my mind were:
-re-use existing ways (seems excessively complex)
-trace a new farmland way along parallel to them (a lot of work to get an outline that's accurate)On the plus side it seems to render ok :)
Mark
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
If it helps, here's an example of what I've done nearer to home:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/250738518
Survey and map all the field boundaries, gates, stiles, hedges and fences first, then reuse the fence / hedge nodes for a separate farmland way. It's not the only way to do things - just providing it as an example.
-
Comment from mdt3k
That looks good. I will try and use a similar model. I will adapt this set of changes as I have time to reflect this.
-
Comment from DaveF
Hi mdt3k
I believe making OSM more entropic by unnecessarily splitting way makes it more confusing & harder for others to edit.
Instead of splitting & creating an unnecessary relation for this residential area: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5494095 the farmland way should be drawn as a parallel way adjacent, or even on top of the residential.https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369745839
Road way represent the infinitesimally thin centre line of the road. Adding field boundaries to them cause mayhem for routing software. If other entities are added, such as barrier=gate/fence it says that they're in the middle of the road. Clearly not the case. Please offset the farmland to the side of the road Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.38766/-2.40862FYI I've started a conversion on the tagging list to fid out how others are using landuse=farmland:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2015-September/026477.html -
Comment from mdt3k
Thanks for the feedback Dave, I'll sort those out.
Mark -
Comment from DaveF
Thos were just a couple of examples. You've placed many ways on the roads that need to be offset.
Please be aware farmland is meant to be used to map individual fields, not swathes of land
Rather than split every entity up into small sections & spend a lot of time creating relations, why not just trace around those entities & roads? It would be much quicker.
You've ended up this kind of nonsense: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.41423/-2.39307 -
Comment from mdt3k
Hi Dave, I have updated the problems highlighted, and the relation no longer uses the roads.
Regarding the intent for landuse=farmland, I do not believe this is clear. No conclusion was reached on the tagging mailing list, and the wiki is not explicit.
I believe am using landuse=farmland in a manner that is consistent with the other landuse tags (e.g. landuse=residential).
- Kelston Road (369745845), v1
- Kelston Road (369745849), v1
- Lansdown Lane (369745850), v1
- London Road (369745851), v1
- London Road (369745852), v1
- London Road (369745853), v1
- Penn Hill Road (369745854), v1
- Penn Hill Road (369745855), v1
- Roman Road (369745856), v1
- Toghill Lane (369745857), v1
- West Brook (369745858), v1
- West Brook (369745859), v1
- West Brook (369745860), v1
- 369745861, v1
- 369745862, v1
- 369745863, v1
- 369745864, v1
- 369745865, v1
- 369745866, v1
- 101971610, v2
Relations (19)
- Aubrey Meads Play Area (5494087), v1
- Oldfield School (5494088), v1
- Weston All Saints C Of E Primary School (5494089), v1
- Weston Recreation Ground (5494090), v1
- 5494091, v1
- 5494092, v1
- 5494093, v1
- 5494094, v1
- 5494095, v1
- 5494096, v1
- 5494097, v1
- 5494098, v1
- 5494099, v1
- City of Bath (5342409), v8
- Charlcombe CP (2954119), v4
- 1754460, v3
- 1316525, v41
- 3186770, v2
- 635: Bristol - Chippenham (288491), v68
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |