landuse=farmland and highway=track

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

landuse=farmland and highway=track

Gerd Petermann

Hi all,


I am currently (armchair) mapping rural areas in Japan, that means realigning nearly all

existing ways.


Whenever I am mapping landuse=farmland areas I wonder whether I should

1) draw one rather large polygon stretching across all highway=track ways

and small buildings which are likely used by the farmer and waterway=ditch ways or

2) draw small polygons so that none of these objects is "covered".


Obviously option 1) is easier and results in rather few landuse polygons while 2) is

much more work and results in many typically nearly rectangular shapes.


My current approach is this:

a) I prefer NOT to draw landuse polygons across a major highway or a track with tracktype=grade1.

b) When a building looks like a building=barn I prefer to think of it as part of the farmland .

(I am always unsure about greenhouses on farmland.)

c) I also think of ditches (not going along roads) as part of farmland, so I draw polygons across them.


My problem: When I start to draw these polygons I feel an urge to complete the work,

and that can be quite time consuming ;-) 


Is there a tool for this ? Maybe a plugin for JOSM ?

Or maybe I should go more in direction of option 1)  first and let locals do the details ?


Gerd


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

AlaskaDave
Haha, welcome to the club. This is a problem everyone faces. Here in Thailand I spend a lot of time breaking up large wood multipolygons because in the early days folks did not take the time to do it right. Woods do not cover highways (unless its a farm track) nor do they cover water features like river valleys or reservoirs. I can tell you this, it's a lot of work either way you decide to do it but future mappers will thank you if you do it properly in the first place.

I have found the Fastdraw plugin to be helpful but only if you're wanting to follow outlines accurately. The tool takes a while to master and it creates many more nodes than would just a quick outline. Take for example an area I just "enhanced" - the wood polygon north of the junction of 1045 and 1047 was originally comprised of about 12 nodes. After I traced the southern edge of the wood more closely, it now contains 966 nodes. Imagine how many nodes and how much time would be required to do all the wood multipolygons worldwide. It's off-putting to say the least.


It looks better and is more accurate but takes up a lot more space on the server. And it took a few patient minutes to trace. YMMV

Cheers,
Dave
This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Gerd Petermann <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,


I am currently (armchair) mapping rural areas in Japan, that means realigning nearly all

existing ways.


Whenever I am mapping landuse=farmland areas I wonder whether I should

1) draw one rather large polygon stretching across all highway=track ways

and small buildings which are likely used by the farmer and waterway=ditch ways or

2) draw small polygons so that none of these objects is "covered".


Obviously option 1) is easier and results in rather few landuse polygons while 2) is

much more work and results in many typically nearly rectangular shapes.


My current approach is this:

a) I prefer NOT to draw landuse polygons across a major highway or a track with tracktype=grade1.

b) When a building looks like a building=barn I prefer to think of it as part of the farmland .

(I am always unsure about greenhouses on farmland.)

c) I also think of ditches (not going along roads) as part of farmland, so I draw polygons across them.


My problem: When I start to draw these polygons I feel an urge to complete the work,

and that can be quite time consuming ;-) 


Is there a tool for this ? Maybe a plugin for JOSM ?

Or maybe I should go more in direction of option 1)  first and let locals do the details ?


Gerd


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Gerd Petermann
Dave Swarthout wrote
Haha, welcome to the club. This is a problem everyone faces. Here in
Thailand I spend a lot of time breaking up large wood multipolygons because
in the early days folks did not take the time to do it right. Woods do not
cover highways (unless its a farm track) nor do they cover water features
like river valleys or reservoirs. I can tell you this, it's a lot of work
either way you decide to do it but future mappers will thank you if you do
it properly in the first place.
Oh, yes, I also have that problem with natural=wood polygons, often containing
nearly 2000 nodes and typically completely wrong (according to the ortorectified GSI images),
covering large parts of residential areas, farmland, water, and so on.
In my eyes landuse or natural polygons should never be that
complex, when I create one with more than 100 nodes I start
feeling uncomfortable.

Dave Swarthout wrote
I have found the Fastdraw plugin to be helpful but only if you're wanting
to follow outlines accurately. The tool takes a while to master and it
creates many more nodes than would just a quick outline. Take for example
an area I just "enhanced" - the wood polygon north of the junction of 1045
and 1047 was originally comprised of about 12 nodes. After I traced the
southern edge of the wood more closely, it now contains 966 nodes. Imagine
how many nodes and how much time would be required to do all the wood
multipolygons worldwide. It's off-putting to say the least.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=%2017.7009941%2C%20100.6239762#map=15/17.6990/100.6190

It looks better and is more accurate but takes up a lot more space on the
server. And it took a few patient minutes to trace. YMMV
Will have a look at it, but it doesn't sound like a tool I would want to use unless it can be configured to
use fewer nodes. Also not sure what is meant with "it looks better".
I think wood polygons have the same problem like water polygons, you have to simplify,
else you'll end up with mapping each tree (or each branch if you like ... )

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Warin
In reply to this post by AlaskaDave
On 10/01/2016 8:23 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote:
Haha, welcome to the club. This is a problem everyone faces. Here in Thailand I spend a lot of time breaking up large wood multipolygons because in the early days folks did not take the time to do it right. Woods do not cover highways (unless its a farm track) nor do they cover water features like river valleys or reservoirs. I can tell you this, it's a lot of work either way you decide to do it but future mappers will thank you if you do it properly in the first place.

I have found the Fastdraw plugin to be helpful but only if you're wanting to follow outlines accurately. The tool takes a while to master and it creates many more nodes than would just a quick outline. Take for example an area I just "enhanced" - the wood polygon north of the junction of 1045 and 1047 was originally comprised of about 12 nodes. After I traced the southern edge of the wood more closely, it now contains 966 nodes. Imagine how many nodes and how much time would be required to do all the wood multipolygons worldwide. It's off-putting to say the least.


It looks better and is more accurate but takes up a lot more space on the server. And it took a few patient minutes to trace. YMMV

Cheers,
Dave
This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Gerd Petermann <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,


I am currently (armchair) mapping rural areas in Japan, that means realigning nearly all

existing ways.


Whenever I am mapping landuse=farmland areas I wonder whether I should

1) draw one rather large polygon stretching across all highway=track ways

and small buildings which are likely used by the farmer and waterway=ditch ways or

2) draw small polygons so that none of these objects is "covered".


Obviously option 1) is easier and results in rather few landuse polygons while 2) is

much more work and results in many typically nearly rectangular shapes.


Having spent many hours recently mapping State Forests, national Park and Conservation areas in NSW, Australia ... some comments...
Some of these are multipolygons with nodes over 3,000 on the outside. None of them are  orthogonal for all edges. 
The data shows the easements for roads. Unless the easements are very large I have left them off... can only do so much in the time available. 
I take the view that residential areas are drawn over an entire area .. and then roads, parks, buildings are drawn over the top of it. I think the same should occur with other things. 
The existing multipolygons have taken no account of roads nor streams of any description. 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Warin
In reply to this post by Gerd Petermann
On 10/01/2016 8:55 PM, Gerd Petermann wrote:

> Dave Swarthout wrote
>> Haha, welcome to the club. This is a problem everyone faces. Here in
>> Thailand I spend a lot of time breaking up large wood multipolygons
>> because
>> in the early days folks did not take the time to do it right. Woods do not
>> cover highways (unless its a farm track) nor do they cover water features
>> like river valleys or reservoirs. I can tell you this, it's a lot of work
>> either way you decide to do it but future mappers will thank you if you do
>> it properly in the first place.
> Oh, yes, I also have that problem with natural=wood polygons, often
> containing
> nearly 2000 nodes and typically completely wrong (according to the
> ortorectified GSI images),
> covering large parts of residential areas, farmland, water, and so on.
> In my eyes landuse or natural polygons should never be that
> complex, when I create one with more than 100 nodes I start
> feeling uncomfortable.

:-D      Come to Australia...

Stuart national Park covers over 340,000 hectares .. most of its boundaries are orthogonal though..

Kosciuszko National Park covers about 690,000 hectares (1.5 million aces) ... has a very crinkly boundary!



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Gerd Petermann
Warin wrote
On 10/01/2016 8:55 PM, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> Dave Swarthout wrote
>> Haha, welcome to the club. This is a problem everyone faces. Here in
>> Thailand I spend a lot of time breaking up large wood multipolygons
>> because
>> in the early days folks did not take the time to do it right. Woods do not
>> cover highways (unless its a farm track) nor do they cover water features
>> like river valleys or reservoirs. I can tell you this, it's a lot of work
>> either way you decide to do it but future mappers will thank you if you do
>> it properly in the first place.
> Oh, yes, I also have that problem with natural=wood polygons, often
> containing
> nearly 2000 nodes and typically completely wrong (according to the
> ortorectified GSI images),
> covering large parts of residential areas, farmland, water, and so on.
> In my eyes landuse or natural polygons should never be that
> complex, when I create one with more than 100 nodes I start
> feeling uncomfortable.

:-D      Come to Australia...

Stuart national Park covers over 340,000 hectares .. most of its boundaries are orthogonal though..

Kosciuszko National Park covers about 690,000 hectares (1.5 million aces) ... has a very crinkly boundary!
OK, wood is probably much more complex, but the subject is about farmland.
I guess whenever machines (tractors etc.) are used on it the shapes will be rather simple.

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

John Willis
In reply to this post by Gerd Petermann

On Jan 10, 2016, at 5:21 PM, Gerd Petermann <[hidden email]> wrote:

Whenever I am mapping landuse=farmland areas I wonder whether I should 
1) draw one rather large polygon stretching across all highway=track ways 
and small buildings which are likely used by the farmer and waterway=ditch ways or
2) draw small polygons so that none of these objects is "covered".


Well, depending on how much time you want to devote to it, you can go down this rabbit hole pretty deep. 

When I first started mapping - I was trying to map my residential area, which was mostly small contoured rice fields. I ended up drawing a field only where the field itself was, ignoring the dirt berm in the center, which shows the fields, and looks good when rendering. But takes forever and needs good imagery (which is why my tracings are crap). http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/36.4313/139.2578  

After I started armchair mapping other places (and visiting them to check to tougher spots), I still drew individual polygons for the fields when I could, with the dirt berms as borders, so they shared nodes. Fields not used for rice, I usually use shared nodes for the fields when I can. There are so many abandoned fields (now totally scrub, possibly filled with dead kei trucks) or other areas, like slopes and terrace walls that I try not to map over either. 

If that isn’t an option, then try to stay “inside” the farmer’s land. The tracks and other things around a field are probably part of the farmland, but the large drainage canals (with the mechanical water gates), almost any paved narrow public “kei truck service road”  that cuts through/around the farming areas by branching off the unclassified/residential roads leading to farming tracks, and any High Voltage towers are not part of the farm. http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=17/36.35849/139.04623 

Q: is Power Tower Landuse commercial or industrial? or is there some kind of power landuse? I seemed to have flip-flopped on that as I have been tagging.



Greenhouse has the landuse=greenhouse_horticulture, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgreenhouse_horticulture

so if you have a plot of land dedicated to those plastic tube greenhouses (like many together, accessed with tracks), considering mapping all of it as that. There is also a building tag for greenhouse, as those plastic houses stay in the same spot for a decade(or 2 or 3), but mapping them is super tedious, and they render as buildings, not as some sort of half/shaded plastic thing, so the rendering on them isn’t so great. Maybe those are for the more permanent looking square ones made out of glass/thick plastic. 

~~

I was cleaning up/aligning the area around Narita, and there is a ton of very very quickly drawn/imported 1km wide farm polygons that are garbage. even if you map just between the main roads only, each should be 20-100 different polygons - they cross trunk roads and other craziness. breaking them up is more work than the tracing I did for the expressway there. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/161736709#map=13/35.8673/140.4017  here is a big one I have to split up into 50 or so fields, after I ran the tollway through. 

Anything you can do to keep the farm polygon out of the residential and above roads, which is what it sounds like you are doing, should be great. Any further detail is gravy. 

Javbw

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Richard Z.
In reply to this post by Warin
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 09:08:41PM +1100, Warin wrote:

> I take the view that residential areas are drawn over an entire area .. and then roads, parks, buildings are drawn over the top of it. I think the same should occur with other things.

+1: a rural track belongs to the farmland, no need to split it up. Same for creeks
and small rivers in woods.

Richard

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

AlaskaDave
>Will have a look at it, but it doesn't sound like a tool I would want to use
>unless it can be configured to use fewer nodes. Also not sure what is meant with "it looks better".

I mean it follows the actual outline of the forest so therefore it looks more true to life, that is, "better"

The line you get with Fastdraw can be simplified a number of ways. The tool itself has some parameters that affect the density of points but it's easier to just use the up (or down) arrow keys to remove (or add back points) until you're satisfied. Try it, you'll like it.

>I think wood polygons have the same problem like water polygons, you have to
>simplify, else you'll end up with mapping each tree (or each branch if you like ... )

Yes, it's the Mandelbrot fractal concept - the length of the beaches on earth is infinite, it all depends on how small a unit length you use. (Wikipedia)
Still, there is a balance between too much and too little detail. And using only 12 nodes for that wood polygon is too little IMO.


Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Richard Z.


sent from a phone

> Am 10.01.2016 um 13:02 schrieb Richard <[hidden email]>:
>
> +1: a rural track belongs to the farmland, no need to split it up.


this is disputable, at least in Germany a track definitely doesn't belong to the adjacent farmland. Whether you want to split it up or don't care for this detail is up to you, but factually it doesn't.

cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Gerd Petermann


sent from a phone

Am 10.01.2016 um 09:21 schrieb Gerd Petermann <[hidden email]>:

I am currently (armchair) mapping rural areas in Japan, that means realigning nearly all

existing ways.



how do you know the correct alignment if you're just armchair mapping? It is possible that the imagery you are using is misaligned...

cheers,
Martin 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Gerd Petermann
dieterdreist wrote
sent from a phone

> Am 10.01.2016 um 09:21 schrieb Gerd Petermann <[hidden email]>:
>
> I am currently (armchair) mapping rural areas in Japan, that means realigning nearly all
>
> existing ways.
>


how do you know the correct alignment if you're just armchair mapping? It is possible that the imagery you are using is misaligned...
I am using the ortorectified GSI images as suggested here
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PlaneMad/diary/36058

Whenever I check the map against Strava data or OSM GPX layers it
seems to be very accurate. The problem with Yahoo import is not only
bad alignment but also that nearly all minor roads are mistagged
(residential or path instead of track, unclassified instead of residential).
You'll probably find errors in my work as well, but I hope the error rate is
much better than before.

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Florian Lohoff-2
In reply to this post by Gerd Petermann
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 08:21:30AM +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
> I am currently (armchair) mapping rural areas in Japan, that means realigning nearly all
>
> existing ways.
>
>
> Whenever I am mapping landuse=farmland areas I wonder whether I should
>
> 1) draw one rather large polygon stretching across all highway=track ways
> and small buildings which are likely used by the farmer and waterway=ditch ways or
> 2) draw small polygons so that none of these objects is "covered".
>
> Obviously option 1) is easier and results in rather few landuse polygons while 2) is
> much more work and results in many typically nearly rectangular shapes.
I am not so religious about covering tracks in farmland. The point is
that huge polygons tend to break much more often and tend to be much
harder to modify/fix. I personally keep polygons small for that reason.

Also there are much more fine grained tags for agricultural land e.g.
meadow etc - Typically when you map farmland and do it right it does not
grow that huge. You have small wooden strips, waterways with
scrub around, roads etc. I typically even break up at field boundaries
seen in differences in plant growths etc as thats typically the
boundary for changes in usage in the future.

Flo
--
Florian Lohoff                                                 [hidden email]
      We need to self-defend - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today!

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

signature.asc (845 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

dieterdreist

2016-01-11 9:09 GMT+01:00 Florian Lohoff <[hidden email]>:
I am not so religious about covering tracks in farmland. The point is
that huge polygons tend to break much more often and tend to be much
harder to modify/fix. I personally keep polygons small for that reason.

Also there are much more fine grained tags for agricultural land e.g.
meadow etc - Typically when you map farmland and do it right it does not
grow that huge. You have small wooden strips, waterways with
scrub around, roads etc. I typically even break up at field boundaries
seen in differences in plant growths etc as thats typically the
boundary for changes in usage in the future.


completely agree. Huge farmland polygons (at least in the regions where I map, i.e. typically patchy landscapes in high density areas) will sooner or later be modified by subtracting enclosed things that are identified as different, e.g. scrubs, wet zones, tree areas, buildings and isolated dwellings (or also archaeological sites, which are very common in the surroundings here). The worst thing to do is not splitting up the farmland but create a multipolygon relation and start subtracting. After some time these grow to relation monsters, sometimes with tens or even hundreds of inner ways, almost impossible to overlook and very annoying to split up into smaller pieces at this state.


Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Gerd Petermann
In reply to this post by Florian Lohoff-2
Florian Lohoff-2 wrote
Also there are much more fine grained tags for agricultural land e.g.
meadow etc - Typically when you map farmland and do it right it does not
grow that huge. You have small wooden strips, waterways with
scrub around, roads etc. I typically even break up at field boundaries
seen in differences in plant growths etc as thats typically the
boundary for changes in usage in the future.
Sure, one can always do better. Let's look at two ways that I
created yesterday:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/390575189
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/390575208
One may as well combine both ways or create > 30 smaller areas,
each with different details, add ditches and so on. My goal is to more to
improve routing, I map large farmland areas to reduce completely
white (unmapped) areas.

Anyway, if I got that right my approach is okay for me as well as for
future mappers, so thanks for the feedback to anyone.

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

dieterdreist

2016-01-11 10:06 GMT+01:00 Gerd Petermann <[hidden email]>:
Sure, one can always do better. Let's look at two ways that I
created yesterday:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/390575189
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/390575208
One may as well combine both ways or create > 30 smaller areas,
each with different details, add ditches and so on. My goal is to more to
improve routing, I map large farmland areas to reduce completely
white (unmapped) areas.



yes, ultimately it is the mapper deciding everything, btw, these farmlands look fine to me, although you can surely still add more detail. This is a counterexample I just found by looking at the map, which I find way too big and not corresponding well in detail to what else is already mapped: www.openstreetmap.org/way/133672948

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

AlaskaDave

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:
 
This is a counterexample I just found by looking at the map, which I find way too big and not corresponding well in detail to what else is already mapped: www.openstreetmap.org/way/133672948

Wow, that's pretty poor. I would never put my name on something like that.


--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

dieterdreist

2016-01-11 14:20 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout <[hidden email]>:
Wow, that's pretty poor. I would never put my name on something like that.



still it is not so untypical, you can find a lot of similar situations all over the globe, some years ago it was even worse (what at least lets me hope that some very patient people will fix these sooner or later).

e.g. this one is in version 10:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/235112499

compare it to the aerial imagery to see how much you loose if you generalize the landuse and don't map individual fields:
http://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/#14/48.4641/8.8353&num=2&mt0=mapnik&mt1=bing-satellite

The shape and size of fields is a quite interesting detail that tells a lot about the context, topography and history, while just denoting that "there is all fields" is relatively boring ;-)

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Janko Mihelić


pon, 11. sij 2016. 15:08 Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> je napisao:


still it is not so untypical, you can find a lot of similar situations all over the globe, some years ago it was even worse (what at least lets me hope that some very patient people will fix these sooner or later).

I rarely map farmlands, but when I do, I remap these huge areas. I think it's more productive because new mappers might come across some of them and think that's the norm. 

One example of a remap:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/45.4470/18.7432&layers=D

My method is to draw areas between tracks and ditches. My rule is that a tractor should be able to cross each farmland without crossing roads. 

Janko 



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: landuse=farmland and highway=track

Michał Brzozowski
On a side note, tools that generate vector maps seem to be really
clueless about fusing such separated polygons back again at low zoom
to simplify them without blank stripes inbetween and caring about
topological correctness. Is there any GIS toolchain that could
scalably (country/world level) generalize landuse/natural/water
polygons the correct way? I take a guess ArcGIS can do that as their
spatial analysis toolset is very advanced, but anything free?

Michał

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12