On 07.07.2013 18:33, fly wrote:
Could an BE-speaking person please tell me what the right spelling for broad_leafed is. Numbers are almost even in the data. Probably, a nice task for a bot.
It was originally broad_leafed in the Wiki, but it was considered a spelling error and therefore it was changed. See:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:natural%3Dtree#Typo_.22broad_leafed.22.3F
On the other hand, I wonder if it is useful to use type=* and not tree_type=* or tree:type=* as type is the key for relations and it is not that good to use different meanings of one key.
type=* for trees and relations were introduced in times when people didn't care about this.
Now it's implemented like this in all applications and editors, so you cannot change it without breaking something. Unification with wood=* would also be desirable (e.g. foliage=* has been suggested), but has not been approached so far for the same reason.
From a biological point of view, neither of these tags is useful. Woods should better be classified by plant community, and for single trees species=* already implies foliage.
-- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
