On 08/06/18 19:05, Peter Elderson wrote:
Most would agree that it is rather stretching the meaning of forest, but it's the closest availabl tag to get the tree patches rendered on the map.
natural=wood works... and is 'free' of the land use requirement. The word 'natural' has been taken to mean anything in OSM .. sigh. So natural=wood is much bette thatn landuse=forest.
Landcover is a much clear meaning and can be used for 'natural' and 'unnatural'.
So I normally combine it with anything that is tagged 'natural'.
2018-06-08 10:54 GMT+02:00 Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@tutanota.com <mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>>:8. Jun 2018 10:43 by lionel.gi...@gmail.com <mailto:lionel.gi...@gmail.com>: - first, add landcover=trees in the renderer (putting it the same as landuse=forest probably), just to make a get a better tagging in area that are not a forest (in other landuse especially). It will gradually help to reduce the quantity of "misuse" of the other tags "natural=wood" and "landuse=forest" Main problem is that many do not consider current usage of landuse=forest to be a misuse. It is just how this extremely popular tag is used. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging> -- Vr gr Peter Elderson _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
