<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
This definition seems also fine to me</div>
<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<blockquote style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">
<p><font face="Verdana">For <b>natural=shrubs</b> "Is a group of shrubs or bushes, characterised by stems with mostly a woody appearance and branches appearing at or close to the ground. In some cases the stem(s) are not woody like f.i. in most cacti and some
low growing bamboos." </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p><font face="Verdana"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana"><br>
</font>It wasn't intended to include a path in the definition, it can be ignored.</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">
<blockquote type="cite"><font size="+1"><span>FWIW, I disagree with the contention by @Vincent that a "shrubbery" MUST contain a path. He cites wikipedia as his source, but IMHO wikipedia is not infallible. I could envisage a garden containing a lawn (managed
grass), with a collection of planted and managed shrubs beyond it, which would be called a "shrubbery". I also see little point in mapping an area in OSM to say that "in this area are some tended plants and some paths", but not mapping the paths.</span></font></blockquote>
<div><font size="+1">True. But we would advise to tag shrubbery due to it's controversy, by attribution as a specific form of shrub. Any paths should be mapped separately as paths running through the area tagged as
<b>natural=shrubs</b> and <b>shrubs=shrubbery</b>.</font></div>
</blockquote>
<div><font size="+1"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font size="+1"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font size="+1">A valid argument though cat and car are different things. Scrub, shrub and shrubs are different, similar words for almost the same thing. Without wiki, are the values the descriptive enough?</font></div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">
<blockquote type="cite"><font size="+1"><span>It is unfortunate that "scrub" and "shrub" differ by only one letter, but we manage to distinguish between a "car" and a "cat" ;-) </span></font></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><font size="+1">Haha, very well said. But also consider that most languages have no decent distinguished translation for "shrubbery". Scrub is singular, as it describes a single area or group of plants. Shrubs
is plural and a keen mapper should be informed and notice this difference.</font>
<p></p>
<p><font size="+1">@Martin:</font></p>
</blockquote>
<p><font size="+1"><br>
</font></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">
<p></p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>if it is not woody (specific low growing bamboo), it would be "grass", or not? (I am not a botanic, as you may see from this sentence).</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div>Kind regards,</div>
<div>Vincent</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>