<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Feb 4, 2021, 10:05 by mail@jeroenhoek.nl:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>landcover=grass shows a gradual increase in use though:<br></div><div><br></div><div>https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landcover=grass#chronology<br></div></blockquote><div><a href="https://taghistory.raifer.tech/#***/landcover/grass&***/landuse/grass">https://taghistory.raifer.tech/#***/landcover/grass&***/landuse/grass</a><br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>And yes, landcover gets rejected in iD, JOSM, and Carto, so we remain at<br></div><div>a standstill where the status quo is that landuse=grass, natural=scrub,<br></div><div>and landuse=forest are misused, because there isn't anything else to<br></div><div>use, because any proposal to introduce tags that do fit will have to<br></div><div>compete with tags that are misused, but do render nicely and are<br></div><div>supported out of the box in the editors.<br></div><div><br></div><div>At some point I would like to move forward on this issue, and due to the<br></div><div>inherent dependency on its rendering (due to the fact that these are<br></div><div>highly visible on Carto), some concerted effort between the mapping<br></div><div>community and the Carto maintainers would be welcome.<br></div></blockquote><div>I am not sure what would be preferable, I am scared by that mess.<br></div><div><br></div><div>If I would be Imperator of Everything then we would have<br></div><div>landcover=trees, maxspeed:signed=no and some other things.<br></div><div><br></div><div>lanes key would be defined or named differently.<br></div><div><br></div><div>sqkm=*, is_in:continent, place=ocean, place=continent would not exist.<br></div><div><br></div><div>But as I am not an Imperator of Everything...<br></div><div><br></div><div>Trying to deprecate landuse=forest or natural=wood<br></div><div>feels me with dread and I prefer to do things more likely to succeed<br></div><div>and less likely to be overall harmful (like deprecating obviously<br></div><div>duplicated or obviously problematic tags, we have no shortage of that<br></div><div>- if someone wants to deprecate something look at<br></div><div>- <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sqkm">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sqkm</a><br></div><div>- <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic</a><br></div><div>- surface=unpaved_minor (what is that?)<br></div><div>- surface=interlock (what is that?)<br></div><div>- <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tags_with_verifiability_issues">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tags_with_verifiability_issues</a><br></div><div>- lanes tag (lanes:total including bicycle lanes would be nice)<br></div><div>- usage of place=plot without name<br></div><div>- lack of tag for "you cannot carry bicycle here" (bicycle=no, bicycle=dismount mess)<br></div><div>- and feel free to take over <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/deprecate_class:bicycle_tag_family">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/deprecate_class:bicycle_tag_family</a><br></div><div>).<br></div><div><br></div><div>As I am not even sure whatever landcover=trees transition would<br></div><div>be overall positive and worth doing this I am not going to declare anything.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Note that in over 9 years since landcover=* was proposed noone bothered<br></div><div>to finish proposal and even try going through proposal process,<br></div><div>I am also highly dubious about overall support for this idea and<br></div><div>I remember being annoyed by attempts to use OSM Carto rendering<br></div><div>as way to promote this tag despite dubious support, there were also<br></div><div>some very dubious claims about its popularity and support<br></div><div>among mappers.<br></div> </body>
</html>