<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/2/21 3:12 pm, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAMrfQx3e=80fr-rb2YGucK=3EZ_3MSNK8XKx5ryG+JPX9osqOQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">So, landcover only has two values that have any
meaningful amount of usage:</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>And landscaping has negligible amount of use. I would not put any
weight on the amount of use something has. <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAMrfQx3e=80fr-rb2YGucK=3EZ_3MSNK8XKx5ryG+JPX9osqOQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div>landcover=trees which overlaps with the overwhelmingly more
popular natural=wood and landuse=forest</div>
<div>landcover=grass which overlaps with the overwhelmingly more
popular landuse=grass </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I personally like the idea of landcover, and I think it was
a good idea when Martin introduced it 11 years ago (well
before my time on the list) but it hasn't gone to a vote or
really caught on in actual tagging. For example,
landcover=water is certainly superior from an ontology
perspective to natural=water (which includes man-made
reservoirs), but alas here we are. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In an alternate universe where landcover was a widely
accepted/used tagging scheme, you might imagine that
landcover=landscaping could be a valid top-level tag, with a
collection of landscaping=* tags to further define the type of
landscaping.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>No .. I don't see landscaping as a land cover but as a process of
establishing and possibly maintaining a particular land cover/s.</p>
<p>Possibly sub tags of <br>
</p>
<p>established_by=nature/man/*</p>
<p>maintained_by:nature/man/*<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAMrfQx3e=80fr-rb2YGucK=3EZ_3MSNK8XKx5ryG+JPX9osqOQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 10:58
PM Graeme Fitzpatrick <<a
href="mailto:graemefitz1@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true">graemefitz1@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br clear="all">
<br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at
10:06, Brian M. Sperlongano <<a
href="mailto:zelonewolf@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">zelonewolf@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>What is really being asked for here is
tagging to micro-map small landscaping
features. Perhaps there is an opportunity here
to create a new top-level key for this purpose.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I would call this key "landscaping" and it
would take the form
landscaping=type_of_landscaping.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I like it.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>At what point, though, does landscaping= become
landcover=?<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>See above sub tag comment for tags on establishment and
maintained. <br>
</p>
<br>
</body>
</html>