Changeset: 49360411
site of Djurslands Efterskole mapped. Some time since I’ve been there but I think i got it more or less.
Closed by kreuzschnabel
Tags
created_by | JOSM/1.5 (12275 de) |
---|---|
source | Bing |
Discussion
-
Comment from Hjart
Why did you remove the place=village from the polygon?
-
Comment from kreuzschnabel
Since most places (including this one) cover more than just the residential area, it’s highly recommended to put the place=* data to a separate node placed at its center (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dresidential#Named_residential_areas) and leave the residential area unnamed unless it really has a name on its own which is not a place (like "xyz housing area").
-
Comment from kreuzschnabel
This has been done properly on Fjellerup Strand, by the way.
-
Comment from Hjart
I dont' see that as a good reason to have place=* etc on a node only. Mind you that I've been working to transfer lots village names etc to polygons. If the place=* covers more than just a residential area the better choice would be to create a polygon which encompasses the other areas too rather than just create a node.
-
Comment from Hjart
Also note the sentence "although the area has clearly advantages even if only approximative. " in the text you linked to.
-
Comment from Hjart
In some hamlets buildings are spread out with fields, etc in between. Because you can't really define a boundary I use a node only for these, but for fairly welldefined villages like Fjellerup I think it's usually better to tag the polygon.
-
Comment from kreuzschnabel
Please read the entire sentence: " if the boundary of the area corresponding to the name is not clearly defined (as is often the case) you can consider putting such place tags on a separate node, although the area has clearly advantages even if only approximative."
This recommends a place node or a separate (i.e. not the residential!) polygon encompassing everything the place covers (not just the residential area) while it says that if you don’t know the precise borders of the place coverage, the node is clearly to be preferred "although …" (then follows the phrase you quoted). Well, I’m not going to discuss this any longer. Feel free to revert if I was doing wrong.
-
Comment from Hjart
I reverted already.
I did in fact read the sentence in it's entirety and we apparently just read it in different ways. The way I read it there's no "recommendation" to put the tags on a node only if the village boundary isn't perfectly well defined. It's only said that you can "consider" it. Also I think that when the entire village is practically residential it's perfectly ok to put the place=* etc tags on the landuse=residential polygon. -
Comment from kreuzschnabel
You should revert entirely. As of now, the Djurslands Efterskole is not part of the place.
The paragraph in question discusses the use of a place node vs. the use of a place polygon (although approximate) covering the entire place. It does not touch the habit of tagging the place=* to a residential area.
Ways (6)
- 499024189, v1
- Djurslands Efterskole (499024190), v1
- Åsbjergvej (116863081), v6
- 146038571, v3
- 146038587, v2
- 439112451, v4
- Fjellerup (4903511887), v1
- 4903511888, v1
- 4903511889, v1
- 4903511890, v1
- 4903511891, v1
- 4903511892, v1
- 4903511893, v1
- 4903511894, v1
- 4903511895, v1
- 4903511896, v1
- 4903511897, v1
- 4903511898, v1
- 4903511899, v1
- 4903511900, v1
- 4903511901, v1
- 4903511902, v1
- 478062349, v5
- 478062368, v5
- 478062739, v6
- 478062787, v5
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 |