(Split to a separate thread)
The woods/forest problem is one of the worst tagging cock-ups in OSM.
It's bad enough when alternate values are used to differentiate what is
actually the same object, but in this case it's also the key!
I think you'd be hard pressed to find any area of trees which hasn't
been managed in one way or another by humans; especially in the Western
world. Even in the depths of the Amazonian rainforest or Borneo the
locals use wood for tools/fire/building etc.
Ignoring the landcover argument for a moment, all areas of trees should
be primarily tagged as natural=wood. As with other entities, any further
details which gives clarity should be provided in sub-tags.
Approach 2 is the appropriate example:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Forest,
The four render options on the website render wood & forest primary tags
the same
DaveF
----------
On 26/10/2017 13:37, Janko Mihelić wrote:,> A problem i find is with
landuse=forest. Formally, those are zones that are used for growing
trees. But practically in OSM, that tag is used for any land that is
covered with trees. So formally, landuse=forest shouldn't overlap with
other zones, but practically, until a new tag (landcover=trees) is
rendered, this rule isn't going to be followed.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
