That’s an interesting development in OSM micro-mapping John. Can I put a vote in for using natural=tree_row rather than barrier=fence, if no better options are available. I’m not arguing from the point of rendering, but from the perspective of developing a tagging scheme that will be useful in other orchards and even perhaps timber plantations, if future mappers extend this process. Most (all?) orchards and plantations have woody plants in rows, but only a few have fence-like trellises. Natural=tree_row would be suitable for a wide range of orchards and plantations whereas barrier=fence is much more restricted. It would be a pain if the almond plantations and citrus orchards in a region used one tagging scheme while the nearby vineyards used a different one. I’m certainly glad I don’t have to map them all! Best wishes Ian
> On 16 Oct 2020, at 8:37 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Resending message to the list :-( > > How do we fix it so that "Reply" goes to the list, not just the last poster? > > Thanks > > Graeme > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> > Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 17:20 > Subject: Re: [talk-au] vine row tagging > To: John Bryant <johnwbry...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 16:34, John Bryant <johnwbry...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Well, they want to map rows, to use OSM in a way that will be useful to the >> viticulture community. The idea is to add more detail to vineyards than is >> currently in OSM, which has vineyard areas but not rows. >> >> To some degree, but for viticulture people it would be useful to use >> *actual* rather than assumed locations. > > Fair enough. > >> Referring to the OSM carto rendering? That's a good point. What else could >> we use to describe a vine row? > > As Brendan mentioned, mark them in as fences, which will show a nice straight > line, although that could be called tagging for the renderer! :-) It wouldn't > be altogether wrong though, as they do form a barrier to movement across the > rows! > >> do features like vine rows belong in OSM? Does the difficulty in finding a >> tagging schema for vine rows point to an incompatible feature type? I had >> assumed that because they're readily observable on the ground, and >> relatively persistent, it would make sense to map them... but if there's a >> reason they shouldn't be in OSM it would be good to know, so the folks I'm >> helping can change course. > > I guess that's a question of what do the end-users want to see about "their" > land? Most would probably be happy just to see it as a vineyard, but if > somebody wants extra detail, is it up to us to say "No"? I wouldn't have said > so, myself! > > Thanks > > Graeme > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
