<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<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><br></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><br></div><div>[1] <a href="http://hydro.iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~sujan/simage/lutype/gridx-gswp2.png">http://hydro.iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~sujan/simage/lutype/gridx-gswp2.png</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards,<br></div><div><br></div><div>Vincent van Duijnhoven<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>5 feb. 2021 09:56 van f@zz.de:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 11:12:05PM -0500, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:<br></div><blockquote><div>So, landcover only has two values that have any meaningful amount of usage:<br></div><div><br></div><div>landcover=trees which overlaps with the overwhelmingly more popular<br></div><div>natural=wood and landuse=forest<br></div><div>landcover=grass which overlaps with the overwhelmingly more popular<br></div><div>landuse=grass<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I see landcover as a different issue:<br></div><div><br></div><div>You have industrial areas and some of it is just grass or still wood. <br></div><div>So the whole area by its legal status is an industrial area so you <br></div><div>tag it as a landuse=industrial.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Still the swaths of trees or grass can then be tagged with<br></div><div>"landcover=trees" oder "grass". <br></div><div><br></div><div>landuse is more some kind of "legal" status of an area (We map it by<br></div><div>on the ground observation). Landcover describes its visual deviation<br></div><div>from its legal state.<br></div><div><br></div><div>I try to see OSM as a strict hierarchy. There should be partially<br></div><div>overlapping areas. Either a parking lot belongs to a retail area or <br></div><div>it doesnt - so its either within or outside of the landuse=retail.<br></div><div>It shouldnt overlap.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Flo<br></div><div>-- <br></div><div>Florian Lohoff f@zz.de<br></div><div>"Autoritaetsduselei ist der groesste Feind der Wahrheit" - Albert Einstein<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div> </body>
</html>