Twitter: @Acrosscanada Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:35 AM, andrzej zaborowski <balr...@gmail.com>wrote: > 2009/7/20 David Earl <da...@frankieandshadow.com>: > > natural=wood is the widely used tag for a wood (over 65,000 of them and > > currently rendered widely. landuse=wood by comparison has never been > > widely used (only 214 occurrences currently). landuse=forest (why not > > natural=forest? just history) suggested for larger areas of woodland or > > actively managed trees. > > or rather, > landuse=forest -> actively managed trees, > natural=wood -> natural woodland > > hence why it's landuse=forest and not natural=. Does this make sense? > Actually, yup, its a POV :) In the Canada and USA, and world, the term "forest" means different things. Depending on your perspective (and who your boss is). ... according to tree-huggers, all trees that are standing SHOULD be protected, and designated as a national park. :) ... tree's were there way longer than people, and should be more respected :-) ... Anyway, tree's are just a THING that provides everything for the land and people get in the way and mess it up. just as sand is a THING ... but when it's used in different ways, then it becomes an amenity or a landuse. ie. landuse=nature_reserve doesn't necessarly say what is physically on the ground, it just says what the atrificial boundary area covers, and politically people say what can and can't be done on the physical land. so boundary=national_park is rendered 'ON TOP' of both natural=wood and natural=rock and natural=sand and natural=water. Personally, i can make natural=forest happen a million times over :) But anyway, The point is, in OSM there are 2 types of tagging 1 - tagging physical attributes 2 - tagging the non-physical (ownership property boundary) It's almost like a map overlayed ontop of the physical map. Where the lines do not intersect anywhere. So for the physical, you need to know what is actually on the ground. Do you see many trees in cluster? then you can call it whatever you like. ... (BTW, i the tag proposal natural=rock, and nutural=sand and natural=ice and natural=water) needs tobe further used :) >From Natural Resources Canada; 89- Wooded area - Interpreted - is defined as; "More than 35% of the wooded area is covered with trees and shrubs over 2 meters in height. The wooded regions interpreted can include logged and burned-over areas, and avalanche corridors. " and 89- Wooded area - Extracted - is defined as; "More than 50% of the wooded area is covered with trees and shrubs over 2 meters in height." So IMO, basically tagging it as natural=wood is fine, BUT this is just a 'baselayer' tag. Over top of this, we can add in property boundaries, and then tag it as landuse=wood or landuse=industrial; type=pit or landuse=residential or whatever. Hopefully that makes sence, Cheers, Sam P.S. Most of Canada is disputed, much like the rest of the world :-) we call it 'Crownland' which means nothing physical, just that is federally owned land. ... but not clearly defined that everyone can see. .... that is, until OpenStreetMap is complete :-) > Cheers > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
