On 28-Oct-17 10:54 PM, Dave F wrote:
On 27/10/2017 20:53, Warin wrote:
On 27-Oct-17 08:25 PM, Dave F wrote:
You appear to be differentiating based on size & location which,
seeing OSM's output is visual & geospatial seems unnecessary.
*All* groups of trees are 'natural' so there should only be one
primary tag. All "purposes" should be within sub-tags.
Your definition of 'natural' must be different for mine. :)
Quelle surprise :)
A tree that is grown in a nursery from grafted stock, planted and
nurtured in a green house and then finally planted outside ... to me
is not 'natural'.
A 'natural' tree grown from a seed that comes off a tree by natural
means, falls to the ground and than grows without human interference
to full size.
I don't really agree with this, but for the purpose of my main
argument: 'Unifying the key tag for groups of trees'; 'natural' is
interchangeable with your preferred 'landcover'. What key used is
arguable, but, whichever, there should only be *one*.
--------------
? "All "purposes" should be within sub-tags. "
Umm so you would remove landuse? landuse=residential would be a
subtag .. under what?
Maybe 'purposes' was a bit confusing, I see landuse=residential as a
primary tag. Sub-tags are 'descriptive', 'adjective'. The 'cuisine' of
a restaurant, or 'managed' for woods. for example.
I see landuse as the primary tag, the values used with it are descriptive.
There are secondary or sub tags such as 'name' that add details.
The 'landuse' tag when combined with forest is a misuse of a primary
tag as it's being used as an adjective.
The landuse=forest will not always have trees on it. From time to time
they may be harvested and result in no trees.
In this case, whether it's managed or not. Actually, it's use is even
more confusing with people using it to describe the size of the area &
density of trees, which, again, should be described with sub-tags.
The density of trees in a forestry area may change over time, Usually
these areas are, when first planted, fairly dense in the number of
plants then they are thinned as the trees grow to select the better
trees to reach maturity.
I don't bother adding the landcover to landuse=forest as it changes and
I'm not prepared to track that and map it.
To me the landcover is secondary to the landuse tag in forestry areas as
one is fairly permanent while the other changes over time.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
