From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Garden beds?

I had thought that leisure=garden meant the garden bed: the flowers etc, where one does not walk, within a park. And that's how I've used it: [1]. If that's not correct (ie, the entire "gardens" should be tagged leisure=garden), then what tag should be used for the actual garden beds themselves? Stevage 04:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Tag the entire garden, including the bits you can walk in. You can always add sub-gardens if it's a large or complex garden: see Proposed features/Garden specification for a proposal which specifies garden types. Grassy areas: landuse=grass. Footpaths can be mapped as footways or paths. Flower beds can change from year to year, and might not be notable or long-lasting enough to map individually. --achadwick 12:43, 26 October 2010 (BST)

Flower beds usually are on the same spot from year to year, the flowers could change though. man_made=flower_bed? garden=flower_bed, garden:detail=flower_bed. Is there a general name in english for areas of planted things, not just flowers?/Johan Jönsson 10:59, 4 September 2012 (BST)

Deprecate this for private, residential gardens?

I move to deprecate the use of leisure=garden for private, residential gardens. Such gardens are of vanishingly small interest to the general public's - or the general map user's - leisure activities. Instead I suggest that we change the main page to recommend the combination:


for residential gardens of little interest for the general map data consumer's leisure activities, retaining leisure=garden for gardens which are of general leisure interest. This pattern is in use, as described on the talk page for landuse=residential. It's meaningful since it follows the iterative refinement pattern. Additionally it's backwards-compatible, and I note that no interest has been shown in closing ticket 3302. --achadwick 10:45, 23 May 2011 (BST)

From the mailing list discussion, three possible alternative schemes have emerged:

Tagging Pros Cons
Option 1.
  • Meaningful within a single object.
  • Drill-down refinement of existing meaning.
  • residential=garden is in reasonably widespread use.
  • Landuse implies larger, multi-plot areas.
  • Multiple tags for something really quite simple.
  • Repetition of landuse=* for the most likely use.
Option 2.

Within a separate landuse=residential area. The additional meaning comes from overlap(!)

  • No repetition.
  • Terse and easy to use.
  • Tag is in reasonably widespread use.
  • Drill-down refinement of existing meaning.
  • Is this even a general rule for OSM data?
  • Full meaning is not expressed on a single object.
  • Requires special processing to determine the full meaning.
Option 3.

Within a separate landuse=residential area. The analogy is with building=*.

  • Defines an object's garden-ness, not its residential qualities.
  • Handles occasions where a house's "private residential garden" is inside some other sort of landuse.
  • Can be combined with leisure=garden for objects where leisure=* is appropriate.
  • Full meaning is expressed on a single object.
  • Can be expanded to cover other garden types for leisure=*. Suggest we steal the values from the stale Proposed features/Garden specification
  • Might have to explain harder that leisure=* is inapplicable most of the time, but that's about it.

I find myself tending towards Option 3. at the moment. --achadwick 10:19, 24 May 2011 (BST)

For documentation: there are now the tags: garden:type=* and garden:style=*
--Dieterdreist (talk) 10:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Garden overlaying other areas

Hello people,

I just tagged a few gardens over some highway=pedestrian. The problem is that, even when I modificate the layers and set pedestrian to -5 and garden to +5, it is still not rendered. How can I fix that? --Schumi4ever 14:51, 24 October 2012 (BST)

layer=* should not be used for this stuff. It is just irrelevant. You can use layer=* on stuff like highways.--Cracklinrain (talk) 16:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
You cannot fix the rendering in the mapping (and you should not). It is a decision of the people making the osm-carto style not to respect layers universally for the rendering, and to display highway areas always on top. In this specific case I would say you cannot have a garden and a pedestrian area on the same spot, you should likely remove the gardens from the pedestrian area by using a multipolygon relation, or split the area somehow to avoid the superposition. --Dieterdreist (talk) 10:45, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

umaintained/abandoned areas tagged as leisure=garden

According to such areas also are tagged as leisure=garden. Maybe it would be a good idea to document this (if that is true)? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I am supposing you are writing about gardens, not any unmaintained area, and am replying to this. If you really intended the generic case you name in the title, please clarify. It is a difficult field, as gardens are always in transition, and the process of changing from being a garden to being natural wilderness is smooth. Nonetheless, in the context of a building, where there is a small fenced off area associated with this building where plants grow, I believe it is not too far stretched to speak about a garden. I do not think we should be judging the correct form and intensity of "maintenance" that people need dedicate to their gardens in order we can call it a leisure=garden. A garden that is completely left on its own will soon look similar as any "wilderness", but I would still call it a garden (through context).
The Other case you had added with the disclaimer not to use leisure=garden for these were lawns of detached houses in residential areas. Most leisure=garden objects in OSM are residential gardens, and most residential gardens are consisting of lawn, it is one typical usecase for leisure=garden.
For reference, this is the example image for something that is not supposed to be a garden according to the text Mateusz had added:
Rusinovo dacha 02j.JPG
--Dieterdreist (talk) 11:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC)