> IMHO there are semantic implications in the key, as has been said many > times, <...>
And that is subjective -> nobody is wrong -> everybody is right -> everybody thinks THEIR proposal is the right one -> this topic is not settled for so many years -> I suggest doing a compromise and agreeing on ONE tag. (Compromise is currently done on rendering/data extraction side. Nobody cares there about natural/landuse/landcover whatever. It's one forest and that is it) The only other way is to use de facto situation - natural=wood and landuse=forest - and forget this discussion. P.S. And all I wanted was to talk about topology rules... BTW: here is an example of topology rules in Lithuania: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Lithuania/Topology_rules -- Tomas _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
