NOTICE: help.openstreetmap.org is no longer in use from 1st March 2024. Please use the OpenStreetMap Community Forum

# Should the edges of landuse=* or boundary=* areas share points with streets that form their borders?

 14 3 ... especially the when street is a multi-lane divided road? The alternative is, of course, to have the run parallel at the edge of the road. I can see both sides of it. The ways are naturally aligned and in a way are the same, but the trees don't extend into the middle of the street. asked 24 May '11, 21:48 Larry Butler 265●3●6●7 accept rate: 100% aseerel4c26 ♦ 32.6k●18●248●554

 18 In short: no. While landuse areas can (and probably should) share nodes with other areas they are touching like the boundary of next landuse area or the riverbank way they should not share nodes with a street. The reason is - as you correctely stated - that the trees don't extend into the middle of the street. Once we start to map streets the same way as rivers that is with a centerline way for routing and and closed boundary way to record extend then landuse areas should probably share nodes with that outer way. Note however that you should not needlessly change the mapping if a user mapped an area using shared nodes between landuse areas and roads. It's a lot of work which doesn't help much but can introduce a lot of subtile problems. answered 25 May '11, 06:48 petschge 8.3k●21●73●98 accept rate: 21% 1 I don't think you can just answer this with "no"; as Gnonthgol's answer explains, there are pros and cons for both approaches. Still, +1 for a well-reasoned explanation of the possible problems. (25 May '11, 10:26) sleske 4 yes best to keep nodes separate as changes will mess up other stuff when editing. common nodes can save a little time but can be a real pain later (25 May '11, 10:27) andy mackey
 5 In general, the meadow starts beside the road and not in the middle of it. In general, the limits of a country do not grow or shrink with the forest. Etc. Furthermore people tracing roads and boundaries usually work with a higher degree of precision than landuse which they often meet as long straight lines. No blame but it is unpleasant to have to detach the landuse from everywhere when improving roads. So, please attach landuse only to landuse and the person who will rework the road will feel like improving your landuse instead of pushing it aside. answered 22 Mar '13, 17:50 GentilPapou 160●1●4●6 accept rate: 0%
 0 This question still seems to be referred to despite its age. The main principle in this matter is to respect the mapping of other users, and that there are numerous different opinions about the correct way of mapping these adjacent features. In March 2021 the subject of how to map land cover & land use features, in relation to adjacent highways was discussed on talk-gb[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2021-March/026507.html]. There was a wide ranging discussion, but no clear consensus about how the features should be mapped. Where those features border with a highway, the mapper should avoid using shared nodes if possible. answered 27 Mar '21, 14:28 Tallguy 96●2●3●7 accept rate: 50% Note that you can add a road width. That solves the void issue and allows us to map landuse as it actually exists on the ground. Point certainly taken about undoing others' work. (02 Apr '21, 03:44) Joel Amos

By Email:

Markdown Basics

• *italic* or _italic_
• **bold** or __bold__
• image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
• numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
• to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
• basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×205
×103
×92
×15

question asked: 24 May '11, 21:48

question was seen: 13,029 times

last updated: 07 Apr '21, 00:26

### Related questions

NOTICE: help.openstreetmap.org is no longer in use from 1st March 2024. Please use the OpenStreetMap Community Forum