Changeset: 49769444
added Bewdley details
Closed by Martin Wynne
Tags
created_by | iD 2.2.2 |
---|---|
host | http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit |
imagery_used | Bing aerial imagery;OS OpenData StreetView |
locale | en-GB |
Discussion
-
Comment from trigpoint
Hi Martin, is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/502622232 really a park?
It looks a very odd place for a park, and aerial imagery suggests it isn't.
Also it is bad practice to join areas such as this to the centreline of roads. The area will end at the edge and should be mapped as such.
Cheers Phil -
Comment from Martin Wynne
Hi Phil,
I use "park" for any public green space with trees or shrubs, because there doesn't seem to be any other designation available. I have noticed the same used in lots of other places on OSM. "Grass" is ok for plain grass, but this clearly isn't that - see: https://goo.gl/maps/LPuDqLwdNrP2It's a "land-use" boundary, so you can't have a boundary without something on the other side, otherwise it wouldn't be a boundary. If taken only to the kerb, you then need a "road surface" land use for the middle bit, and I haven't been able to find one. It would be a massive waste of effort anyway, because OSM draws roads symbolically over the top without regard to the actual width. In that circumstance, taking boundaries to the road centre-line is the sensible thing to do, and produces the neatest results at different zoom levels.
cheers,
Martin.
-
Comment from chillly
mapping landuse boundaries to the centre lines of roads is not good practice. Your explanation sounds good, but in practice we don't do it. Creating a map image is only one use of OSM data and whatever your renderer of choice does to make the result neatest is not a good justification. A park, or any other landuse, does not extend to the centre of a road. There is an edge before the road begins. At that edge there may be a fence, a kerb, a footway or whatever. If you insist on there being a boundary between two landuse features (which seems pedantic) you could add landuse=highway to describe the extent of the land set aside for the highway and all its features.
A map is a representation of the world. That representation needs guidelines to work well. We do not attach landuse to a highway. That guideline is widely followed and I suggest that you, as a new contributor, might like to follow it too. -
Comment from EdLoach
Personally I'd have mapped it as an area of (mostly) grass and perhaps added an occasional natural=tree node (similarly when I mark an area as wood or forest I don't usually map holes for every clearing in the trees). I also don't like to think about the amount of time I've had to spend ungluing landuse area from road centrelines (in this case I'd have probably extended the residential area across the residential roads to the edge of the grass area).
-
Comment from trigpoint
Please do not tag for the render, a park should only be used for area that are really parks. Mapping is not about making something appear a particular colour on one particular renderer. If I had brought my grandkids here because OSM says there is a park then they and I will be pretty pissed off.
From your description this should more likely be landuseor or landcover=scub.Cheers Phil
-
Comment from Martin Wynne
Hi Ed, You wrote " (in this case I'd have probably extended the residential area across the residential roads to the edge of the grass area)."
This surely illustrates my point - a road is no more a residential area than it is a park.
I found this on the Wiki: "If you choose to let a landuse area end at a road, you have a choice of either re-using the nodes of the way representing the road, or drawing the boundary using new nodes next to the road. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and neither is clearly "wrong" as long as highway landuse is not mapped." See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=residential
cheers,
Martin.
-
Comment from trigpoint
Hi Martin
I forgot to say we do not have permission to use g.maps so please do not look at it, use it to check something, use it to illustrate something. Mapping must be done from what you have seen by being there, imagery we have permission to use, and out of copyright maps and information. -
Comment from Martin Wynne
Hi Phil,
It is clearly not scrub. There is a suggestion on the Wiki to make it village_green for public green space, but that doesn't sound right here.
If you want to visit a proper municipal park, it is likely to have a name, such as "Jubilee Gardens" or whatever.
p.s. I have started reverting the SVR to "preserved" but I'm not happy about it. For example it makes the platforms much more prominent than the tracks when zoomed out, which looks silly.
cheers,
Martin.
-
Comment from Martin Wynne
p.s. I have been there. I use Google Streetview only to confirm my memory of what I saw. Mostly I use OS OpenData to align buildings, water-courses, etc. Also the NLS 25K maps are very useful. The Bing aerial is very poor quality for seeing details.
Will the NLS 25" historic maps ever be available in the editor? That would be great. Often farm tracks, field boundaries, public footpaths, etc. haven't changed for 100 years.
cheers,
Martin.
Ways (4)
Nodes (21-26 of 26)
- 1
- 2
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 |