On 17/08/2015, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 17/08/2015 7:20 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >> In that case it is perfectly OK to do not edit map and keep it as it >> was
The problem with that is that the map will be wrong for 5-15 years (depending on what kind of trees are being grown). I suggest tagging the logged area as natural=scrub, and leave the overall landuse=forest(ry) as-is. >> (yes, as I understand it and it seems to be a widely used in this way - >> landuse=wood, natural=wood, >> landcover=trees are used currently for the same objects). > > Err disagree, they are not the same. > To me "landuse=wood" (or landuse=forestry) imply that the area is used > to produce wood products. > > There are areas that have trees .. that are NOT used to produce wood. > Here I would use natural=wood (or tree/s), landcover=trees. Martin was talking about an area where the trees have recently been logged (harvested), so this is absolutely about wood production. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
