Add rendering for landuse=education

[matthijsmelissen]

The following issue has been moved over from trac:

amenity=school should be used only for the actual facilities. but fellow mappers use it as a substitute for landuse, because it renders nicely in a yellowish color. the problem is, that search results then show two schools (one for the building and one for the area), because there there is not enough data to differentiate between the landuse and the actual school. it gets even worse, when different schools share one estate.

therefore i suggest that landuse=education should be rendered in the same color like amenity=school on areas to give mappers an alternative for defining/coloring the landuse and at the same time solving the problem with too many search results.

[matkoniecz]

title is not matching text, text is duplicate of #773

[matthijsmelissen]

Thanks, fixed.

[matkoniecz]

Used 389 times - http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=education

IMHO 1k uses is a good cutoff to even consider using a tag.

Also it is not documented on wiki what IMHO is also a necessary prerequisite.

[daganzdaanda]

I kind of like the semantics of landuse=education, but I'm not sure if we should "favour" it by rendering?

When I tag a school area, I try to use one area of amenity=school with name and address, and the building(s) get building=school, but not the name again.
What I don't like is when a school building has only amenity and no building tag...

[RobJN]

I disagree with the OPs tagging suggestion. I prefer to map amenity=school on the area and building=school for the individual buildings. This way you can give the school a name and name individual buildings. This becomes more important for university campuses.

I suggest closing this.

[pnorman]

389 uses for what is a very common feature, no wiki page.

[Rovastar]

I was just about to write what is the taginfo values and what is the wiki and editor status.
pnorman has done all that for me. :-)

[dieterdreist]

Am 29/lug/2014 um 01:29 schrieb RobJN notifications@github.com:

I suggest closing this.

+1

[SafetyIng]

Hey,

on the community there is a "new" approving of the landuse=education ; Link to the wiki

The voting is still very fresh. In the course of the weekend, the corresponding wiki pages will be adapted.
What does the carto team think about supporting the rendering? What do you think about the proposed rendering from the proposal? This would leed a lot to the transition strategy, that we would adapt.

[jeisenbe]

Usage is still less than 1000, compared to over 1000,000 amenity=school for example. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=education While the recent voting has approved use of this tag in the uncommon situation where multiple schools share one land area (e.g. they are on different floors of the same building, or they share the whole facility), it is clear that amenity=school / amenity=kindergarten / amenity=university etc will remain the preferred way of tagging most features. Unfortunately the definition of landuse=education is simply "An area predominately used for educational purposes/facilities" which suggests it might be used as an alternative to the more common tags, rather than as a supplement as indicated in the recent approved proposal. It appears the wiki page has not yet been updated since the proposal but still accurately describes the actual use of this tag. Since the new description will be " for grounds with multiple educational amenities (e.g. kindergarten, school) instead the amenity* tag doubled on ground and a node" we will have to wait and see how this tag is used in the future and if it developed in a particular way that is no longer a duplicate of more common tags. At the moment it is too soon to consider rendering.

[SafetyIng]

@jeisenbe

we will have to wait and see how this tag is used in the future and if it developed in a particular way that is no longer a duplicate of more common tags. At the moment it is too soon to consider rendering.

That is really bad.
There will be a lot mappers, That will lead to "mapping for the renderer", because landuse=education is not mapped yet..... A carto support would help to etablish the approved mapping.

[1ec5]

The ink has barely dried on this approved proposal, so a little more patience is necessary. If even a fraction of the already mapped shared schoolgrounds were identified and dual-tagged with landuse=education, that would significantly strengthen the case for supporting landuse=education by itself in this renderer, which would in turn make mappers more comfortable with removing legacy amenity=school usage from those shared schoolgrounds. Of course, the difficult part is identifying shared schoolgrounds tagged as amenity=school, hence the proposal’s success.

[matkoniecz]

And note that proposal explicitly planned

Transition strategy
For the time to transition: There is a suggestion to start adding landuse=education to current areas with amenity=school until enough uses lead to render support in Carto. It also gives other renderers time to change. When there is render support, the tag amenity=school can removed and landuse=education remains on the area.

Additional note: please do not retag blindly or run edits in violation of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct - that can drastically damage any arguments based on tag usage count

[dieterdreist]

I agree with Joseph, despite the approval of landuse for educational purposes, this is not an alternative for tagging individual facilities, and it leads to information loss when schools, universities, kindergartens or other educational facilities are moved from area objects to nodes, so this should be discouraged.

[joelamos]

the difficult part is identifying shared schoolgrounds tagged as amenity=school, hence the proposal’s success.

Given this, I'm curious what criteria need to be met for rendering support. Is there some sampling technique that has been used elsewhere? Otherwise, the same arguments made above could be made in 10 years without any falsifiability.

[jdhoek]

Couldn't landuse=education be treated equal to landuse=religuous? The same concerns about mapping amenity=place_of_worship as nodes instead of areas applies there too, yet it is rendered.

That said, the goal of landuse=education isn't to replace single amenity=school entities mapped as area, but to add a way to map multiple educational facilities on shared grounds, and add a semantically meaningful way to map named educational areas (e.g., campuses). These multiple educational facilities on shared grounds tend to be mapped mapped as nodes already, so rendering landuse=education won't lead to mappers adopting bad practices.

An example:

(As per the proposal such areas are double tagged with amenity=school in the interim. Link to OSM)

This is a typical example of shared grounds and building, hosting two primary schools, a kindergarten, and a community centre. These are mapped as nodes, and cannot be meaningfully mapped as areas. Of course, in cases where multiples schools share grounds and have distinct exclusive areas for their own use within that, these can be mapped as areas within a larger landuse=education.

The previous solution adopted by many mappers was to simply (mis)use amenity=school for the grounds, despite it not representing an actual school. The landuse=education proposal offers a solution to that, and rendering it will allow the community to move on from the double-tagging-for-the-renderer.

---

It is explicitly not the goal of landuse=education to be used as the tag for the grounds of a single amenity=school with its own grounds, as amenity=school already implies landuse=education. This means that the vast majority of school are already tagged as they should be, with no need for explicit tagging of landuse=education. If the wiki doesn't make this clear we can improve that of course.

[joelamos]

@jdhoek I think everyone's clear on the purpose of landuse=education, it's just that the maintainers would like to see it get more actual use before rendering it.

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

On 5 Jul 2021, at 21:27, Jeroen Hoek ***@***.***> wrote: add a semantically meaningful way to map named educational areas (e.g., campuses)

so why did you choose landuse? Landuse is not capable of expressing a “campus” concept.

[jdhoek]

(I'm not the proposal author, so I'm speaking purely as a supporter of this tag.)

I would consider a campus to be a specialized type of (named) educational landuse. I agree that it could do with an additional tag to add the actual 'campus' semantics, but that is no different from a campus tagged with amenity=university (in the ideal case of the extent of a university's grounds being also the most logical area for the amenity=* tag).

Landuses can in my experience be named, something which is frequently done with other types of landuse as well (e.g., retail or religious, and also residential — not in the sense of neighbourhoods of course, but for named developments or estates).

That was left outside of the scope of this proposal though. I don't think it is strange to further specify the type of educational landuse via a sub-key eventually if there is call for that — some mappers did suggest using a further education=* key for that.

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

On 5 Jul 2021, at 22:19, Jeroen Hoek ***@***.***> wrote: Landuses can in my experience be named, something which is frequently done with other types of landuse as well (e.g., retail or religious, and also residential — not in the sense of neighbourhoods of course, but for named developments or estates).

landuse on its own will not get a name, because the name refers to a feature and not to a property. When landuse tags are combined with feature tags (e.g. place, amenity, man_made) it is natural that there will also be a name.

[1ec5]

landuse on its own will not get a name, because the name refers to a feature and not to a property.

This style already has a rule that labels landuse areas based on size, since it’s quite common to name landuse areas when they correspond to what’s named on the ground (for example, a named landuse=commercial area).

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

On 6 Jul 2021, at 11:37, Minh Nguyễn ***@***.***> wrote: for example, a named landuse=commercial area).

if the name refers to a commercial area as in “part of a city” (the term “area” has different meaning), you may consider adding a place tag to it, e.g. place=neighbourhood. This will typically also include the streets and other landuses in the area.

[jdhoek]

There are many named areas that fall below place=neighbourhood, or do not meet the definition of those place-tags. The named commercial area (retail is common too) is a good example of this. Named residential areas are common too, such as named developments (sometimes such names don't last long after construction finishes, sometimes they do). Named landuse is really, really common in OSM.

landuse=military is also a good example of named landuse where the type of area can be further refined via optional military=*. landuse=education seems similar to me.

[dieterdreist]

Am Di., 6. Juli 2021 um 12:28 Uhr schrieb Jeroen Hoek < ***@***.***>:

There are many named areas that fall below place=neighbourhood, or do not meet the definition of those place-tags. The named commercial area (retail is common too) is a good example of this. Named residential areas are common too, such as named developments (sometimes such names don't last long after construction finishes, sometimes they do). Named landuse is really, really common in OSM. landuse=military is also a good example of named landuse where the type of area can be further refined via optional military=*. landuse=education seems similar to me

in osm, everything is possible, for me the question is whether it is desirable. It is true that the neighbourhood article aims mostly at named residential areas (not completely sure, "communities" can also refer to communities of merchants, etc.), but there is actually no reason to limit it to residential use, for landuse we already have "landuse", so you can find out easily whether a toponym (place) refers to an industrial, commercial, retail or residential area, or which are the relations of different landuses inside the area (if there is a mix). And you do not have to ignore different landuses in the area, just to not exclude them from the named place. Note that only 5 percent of all landuses have a name, and that many may also have feature tags as well.

[matheusgomesms]

It would seem like rendering this tag - in the same style as amenity=school - is a no-brainer.

If you have multiple schools on a campus, each with their own amenity=school tag, then it is obviously preferable to tag the larger campus area as landuse=education instead of another school tag just for the outline. Osm-carto should support this tagging by rendering it in the same way.

Exactly. The proposal (and further wiki pages) is well written and there was a lot of discussion regarding it. It was approved, there is a lot of usage now (despite not being rendered yet) and should be supported by OSM-carto. Period.

I know there is a lot of discussion on "carto is the main renderer, so we should be very wary about what we display" and while this is true, it is also true that this was WELL discussed previously, and it has gained popularity. What else should be done to be considered available to be rendered? Especially in a case like this, which seems fairly simple to render exactly like a school or university.

iD and JOSM are even supporting this tag already, so I would highly consider this issue to be reopened (and rendered, of course).

how would you do it, overlap with landuse=education or reduce the campus size?

The same way a mapper should use residential or commercial land use, when there is overlap of both usage in the same area.

[syntex1]

Is 9067 enough to start rendering this tag? We do not have to wait for 10 000. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=landuse%3Deducation

[kocio-pl]

Yes. it looks like this issue is back on track and mature (lot of occurrences, wiki pages), so I reopen it.

Is anyone ready to prepare the code for this? That would make it a lot easier.

[Choreuomai]

Would it be enough to insert [feature = 'landuse_education'] after line 578 in landcover.mss?

[kocio-pl]

Probably not, there is always a database counterpart in project.mml. It should be not too hard, however each time someone plans to make a PR, please always test it before proposing - see CONTRIBUTING.md and INSTALL.md.

[jdhoek]

@kocio-pl @Choreuomai I've set up a PR. Are there any specific instances on the map of landuse=education you want to test?

[HolgerJeromin]

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/118272694 is IMO a typical scenario with its three schools inside.

[boothym]

Also, perhaps one for a new issue but on a related note based on the link above - it would be good for schools with a building tag to have their name rendered in the same way as with a school node on its own. Otherwise it just looks like a named building, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3793902 compared to the Gesamtschule above it.

[Choreuomai]

Great, thank you so much Jeroen! But no, I cannot think of any special case that you might be unaware of.

[jdhoek]

@HolgerJeromin Good example. Unfortunately I am running into a rendering bug there with the text getting cut off. The issue exists on master when I tag that way with amenity=school and remove landuse=education too, so it is likely not related to this issue:

[joshinils]

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/87316791/
is not rendered, previously amenity=school

[Zaczero]

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=school
Is deprecated in favor of landuse=education.

[mfrasca]

fixing a "school area" from amenity=school to landuse=education, the previous editor warns me I have removed the tagging that allowed rendering. in that area we have one building=school, in which in turn there's three different education institutes.
situations like the above are more rule than exception in Italy.

[imagico]

Please no tagging discussion, you both know that.

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

On 4 Sep 2023, at 11:41, Christoph Hormann ***@***.***> wrote: Please no tagging discussion, you both know that.

unless it is on topic, as it apparently seems to both of us.

[mfrasca]

I'm not discussing how to tag objects, I'm telling you that we need landuse=education to be rendered. people out there are tagging areas as amenity=school, resulting in cases like the one I'm reporting, where in reality we have 3 schools, but in the database it's 4: one node for each school, correctly tagged, then one area for the renderer.
if landuse=education were rendered, things would be better.

[imagico]

I looked through the 29 cases returned by the query mentioned in #4524 (comment)

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=fixme&value=Remove+amenity%3Dschool+when+landuse%3Deducation+is+rendered

and these seem to confirm my previous assessment from #4524 (review)

Of the 29 polygons

• 6 have no educational amenity=* inside.
• 7 have a single educational amenity=* inside.
• 12 have multiple educational amenity=* of the same type inside.
• 4 have multiple educational amenity=* of different type inside.

That is 25/29 cases of use with umbrella tag meaning (to tag what is otherwise tagged as amenity=school, amenity=kindergarten, amenity=college etc. but with less specific meaning) - that is even more than the 2/3 estimated in #4524 (review) (though 29 is of course not representative).

This re-affirms my previous assessment from 2022:

If we'd seriously want to consider rendering this tag (in case its use improves in consistency and in semantic delineation towards the competing and much more widely used amenity=* tags) that would IMO have to:

• be in a styling distinct from the educational amenity=* features so it is clear that it is not a synonym for them.
• be in terms of prominence of rendering and in particular labeling clearly semantically subordinate to educational amenity=*. Our current way_area based polygon labeling is exactly the opposite of that.