On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 21:10, Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com> wrote:
Not rendering landuse=forestry on the default OSM map to reduce “tagging > for the renderer” is an interesting idea. I’ll have to think about that but > it does have some appeal. > It doesn't appeal to me. I'd prefer it to render but in a way that differs from landcover=trees or natural=wood (or whatever). 1) It's time-consuming and tedious to map large areas of land used for forestry. Many people won't bother if it doesn't render and either use natural=wood for the entire extent or use only natural=wood where there are currently trees and ignore the areas of stumps or saplings. 2) Somebody may be happy to put the effort into outlining the area used for forestry but may not want to put in the additional effort to use landcover=trees (or whatever) to show where the trees are today (actually, where they were when the aerial imagery was generated) because it's changeable. So to permit minimal mapping we need forestry to show up. 3) Terry Pratchett's *Hogfather* points out that only drawings by children leave a white gap between the ground and the sky. In an ideal world (where we had finally mapped everything) there would be no white areas of the map. Not rendering land used for forestry would prevent us ever reaching that goal. OK, that one's a bit of a stretch. :) -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging