<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div>We get a bit of topic but imo, a piece of land always has a function or design ("inrichting" in Dutch). For some, functions, there is still no proper tag like a potential landuse=highway. That it is not known to the mapper does not mean it has no function. I think that landcover therefore should never be rendered on carto but always serve as a secondary tag. It should never be the only tag on an area because the use is not known.<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>5 feb. 2021 10:53 van pelderson@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Vincent van Duijnhoven:<br></div><div class=""><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class=""><div><div>I think landcover=* should not be used at all as an alternative for for example landuse=grass or landuse=bush|shrubs or natural tags.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree - It's an addition. If an area has no dedicated use, or it's multipurpose, or you simply don't know, or ity's a different patch in a larger landuse area, you use landcover to describe what's there. <br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class=""><div><div>I see it in this way. You have tags like natural=*, landuse=* or leisure=garden | park. These are used to tag the use or design (either an_made or natural) of certain features on a piece of earth. That is imo also what carto is trying to render, more the use, design or functionality of a certain piece of land. Every piece of earth has a certain use or feature be it for example landuse=residential, natural=water or natural=scrub. Landcover on the other hand is more a general describing how a piece of land is covered ( e.g. with forest (decidious/ needleleaved), grass(land) or urban). This should therefore not be used on carto to render an area. There are tags like landuse=* and natural=* for. This is a landcover map [1] and imo it should not be confused with what carto and other OSM maps like cycleOSM are displaying. imo, it is perfectly valid to add a landcover tag as a secondary tag to describe the COVER of a piece of land which can then be used to create a separate landcover map of OSM but that should not be on Carto.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think a general purpose map will show a mix of what you see and what you know, what it's used for and what it looks like (shape and cover), terrain and what's on it.<br></div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class=""><div><div><br></div></div><div>_______________________________________________<br></div><div> Tagging mailing list<br></div><div> <a target="_blank" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" rel="noopener noreferrer">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br></div><div> <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div> </body>
</html>