On 16/12/2019 12:32, Andy Townsend wrote:
* Firstly, I only tend to add farmland etc. after I've added fences,
walls, ditches, gates, bits of woodland etc. (it's just easier
that way around).
* If the crop extends right up to the hedge, I'd tend to have the
hedge sharing nodes
Round here (Cumbria), that would have sheep on it. When I did school
geography, it was called Rough Pasture.
Roger
On 16/12/2019 14:13, Martin Wynne wrote:
I'm happy to use "farmland" to mean cultivated land, whether for cash
crops, pasture for livestock, haymaking, any farming activity.
I'm happy to use "farmland" to mean cultivated land, whether for cash
crops, pasture for livestock, haymaking, any farming activity.
But I keep finding myself on land for which none of the available tags
really seem to apply. There seems to be one missing. For example:
I tend to map to field boundaries: it's all farmland in my view, just not
necessarily productive. In particular strips of grass around arable may be
a short-term consequence of various subsidy schemes, or game cover crops.
Many ditches are there to improve the drainage of the fields so I'd see
On Monday, 16 December 2019, Gareth L wrote:
> I’m all for using a polygon per field, but am unsure what to do at the
> boundaries. Do I make 2 field polygons meet? Or leave a gap as there’s a
> track/hedge/fence/small coppice/ ditch/drain ? I’m probably not going to be
> able to map the
On 16/12/2019 11:59, Gareth L wrote:
I’m all for using a polygon per field, but am unsure what to do at the
boundaries. Do I make 2 field polygons meet? Or leave a gap as there’s a
track/hedge/fence/small coppice/ ditch/drain ? I’m probably not going to be
able to map the boundary
> On Monday, 16 December 2019, David Groom wrote:
>>> -- Original Message --
>>> From: "Dave F via Talk-GB"
>>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>>> Sent: 14/12/2019 15:54:13
>>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] What is farmland?
>
to such
situations:
There are other reasons which others have alluded too.
Jerry
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 at 10:09, David Groom wrote:
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Dave F via Talk-GB"
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Sent: 14/12/2019 15:54:13
> Subject: Re: [
for several years before being developed for
housing/industrial/retail.
On 16/12/2019 10:21, Philip Barnes wrote:
On Monday, 16 December 2019, David Groom wrote:
-- Original Message --
From: "Dave F via Talk-GB"
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: 14/12/2019 15:54:13
Subject: Re
2019, David Groom wrote:
-- Original Message --
From: "Dave F via Talk-GB"
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: 14/12/2019 15:54:13
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] What is farmland?
On 14/12/2019 15:19, Martin Wynne wrote:
Is this "farmland"?
http://85a.uk/haws_hill_960x600.
16 Dec 2019, 11:07 by revi...@pacific-rim.net:
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Dave F via Talk-GB" <> talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> >
> To: > talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Sent: 14/12/2019 15:54:13
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] What is farmland?
>
&
On 16/12/2019 10:07, David Groom wrote:
I see no benefit to mapping individual fields as separate polygons
tagged as farmland if adjacent fields are also farmland. Could you
explain why you think this is best?
I see no reason why mapping individual fields would not be an objective
for OSM.
-- Original Message --
From: "Dave F via Talk-GB"
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: 14/12/2019 15:54:13
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] What is farmland?
On 14/12/2019 15:19, Martin Wynne wrote:
Is this "farmland"?
http://85a.uk/haws_hill_960x600.jpg
I would say ye
On 15/12/19 04:12, John Aldridge wrote:
On 14-Dec-19 16:52, SK53 wrote:
Like Dave I have come to the view that mapping individual fields as
farmland is a good way to do it.
I too concur. Here's the diary entry I wrote when I was doing the
fields round here...
I have at least some crop
On 14-Dec-19 16:52, SK53 wrote:
Like Dave I have come to the view that mapping individual fields as
farmland is a good way to do it.
I too concur. Here's the diary entry I wrote when I was doing the fields
round here...
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jpsa/diary/17738
Cheers,
John
Like Dave I have come to the view that mapping individual fields as
farmland is a good way to do it.
I use farmland=arable & farmland=pasture. This still does not cover cases
of permanent grassland which are not used for pasture. I can see the value
of farmland=livestock for things like pig
Some mappers use meadow for permanent pasture, on the basis that this is a
fundamentally different use of land to putting it under the plough.
Others believe that meadow should be reserved for "real" meadow, and that
permanent pasture should be distinguished from cropland by some combination
of
On 14/12/2019 16:08, Martin Wynne wrote:
I would say yes, as I believe both arable & livestock is farmland.
Thanks Dave.
But in that case, how on OSM do we differentiate between the two?
I would have said farmland=arable/livestock, but it doesn't appear to be
that popular.Have you searched
On 14/12/2019 16:08, Martin Wynne wrote:
I would say yes, as I believe both arable & livestock is farmland.
Thanks Dave.
But in that case, how on OSM do we differentiate between the two?
It seems silly that in some areas of OSM we can go into ridiculous
detail, such as whether a bench
Op za 14 dec. 2019 om 16:09 schreef Martin Wynne :
>
> > I would say yes, as I believe both arable & livestock is farmland.
>
> Thanks Dave.
>
> But in that case, how on OSM do we differentiate between the two?
using an added tag farmland=*
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/keys/farmland
>
I would say yes, as I believe both arable & livestock is farmland.
Thanks Dave.
But in that case, how on OSM do we differentiate between the two?
It seems silly that in some areas of OSM we can go into ridiculous
detail, such as whether a bench seat has a backrest, but vast tracts of
land
On 14/12/2019 15:19, Martin Wynne wrote:
Is this "farmland"?
http://85a.uk/haws_hill_960x600.jpg
I would say yes, as I believe both arable & livestock is farmland.
I concur with your frustration about 'huge multi polygons', especially
when joined to other features such as roads & rivers.
22 matches
Mail list logo
