del 5.2 Results 
; be 
| is 5.2.1 Shape of the urban area 
The Landsat urban area compares visually quite well with the USEMAP 
198" delineation, but there are some important deviations with regard to 
1 /urban conventional land-use-based classifications (Fig. 5): 
3 a : 2 so. 
epar a) differences in definition 
jf the 
ne — no Separation possible between water inside and outside the 
to the urban area; 
all the Twente kanaal is included in the 'urban area', as are 
the water-treatment ponds to the north of Enschede (see A on 
Fig.); 
-— parks and some sports fields are excluded from the urban area 
(see B); 
it is b) misclassification due to spectral characteristics 
? 
hey are — in the Landsat image the residential area of old Stokhorst is 
missing due to the number of large trees covering the houses 
(see €); 
—— — & rural area of about 20 pixels to the south of the Diekman 
sports complex is misclassified as urban (see D); 
c) inconsistency in the classification of vacant land: 
vacant land in the industrial area west of the harbour (E) is 
included, while vacant land in the Wesselerbrink industrial area 
(F) is excluded. On the photographs, both seem to have the same 
type of rough irregular grass. 
Pixels of the areas D, E and F have been plotted in the feature space 
diagram where it is shown that they are bisected indeed by S4 and 
that they are only partly coinciding with the 'urban area' cluster. 
Figure 6 shows a comparison between the urban area delineated by 
USEMAP (after correction for Parks and Water) and the urban area 
delineated by S4. Apart from the areas C to F, there is a good