<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<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);">
For the definition, I only copied the content between "". I intended it be a replacement for the following that is currently in my proposal: </div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<table class="vcard" dir="ltr" style="font-size: 14px; font-family: sans-serif; margin: 2px 0px; background: rgb(238, 238, 238); border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 5px; color: rgb(32, 33, 34);">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th style="text-align:left">Definition:</th>
<td>An area of cultivated decorative shrubs or bushes</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
For the rest of the proposal, I will see how I can write it in a concise way in the proposal so the human factor is clear.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
About the height, I think that mappers are perfectly able to distinguish between heath, bushes and trees without a height indication. The wiki for natural=heath also does not provide a height indication. </div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
Besides Bert, are the more people who prefer natural=shrubs over natural=shrubbery?</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
Kind regards,</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
Vincent</div>
<div id="appendonsend"></div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>Van:</b> Bert -Araali- Van Opstal <bert.araali.afritastic@gmail.com><br>
<b>Verzonden:</b> dinsdag 23 februari 2021 22:47<br>
<b>Aan:</b> tagging@openstreetmap.org <tagging@openstreetmap.org><br>
<b>Onderwerp:</b> Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shrubbery</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div vlink="#551A8B" link="#0B6CDA" alink="#EE0000" style="background-color:#CCCCCC">
<p><font face="Verdana">Vincent I appreciate you try to simplify the definition. However it takes us back to the previous discussions that there was no common ground to justify creating a separate top level value, neither in natural, neither in landcover keys.</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">How does this shortened version make the difference clear between scrub and shrubs. You deleted the human intervention aspect, which as far I see it, was the initial justification to create a separate value in the first place. So if
I read this definition how should I determine the difference between the long time existing scrub and the new shrubs ? Instead of filling in and clarifying to avoid "grey" zone definition you increased it.</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">By deleting the height criteria, not just from scrub and shrubs but also from heath, how can you explain a common mapper or a scientist what makes one different from the other? So if I stand in front of a large area of heather growing
up to my knees, how should I decide if this is heath or scrub or shrubs ?</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Same with wood or trees. I stand in front of a 10m high thicket, how should I call it ? If I ask my 8 year old daughter she calls it a large bush, however the centre of the thicket is a natural grown tree with a trunk of 0.5m wide.
You tell me, I don't know. On top of that, in scientific studies, all landcover studies it is the most distinctive criterium to distinguish scrub and shrubs from trees or wood. Are we simply going to ignore that ?<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">I am not saying my proposed improvement is perfect, lot's of room for improvement, but I don't think shortening, deleting key criteria is going to help us find a consensus.</font></p>
<p><br>
<font face="Verdana"></font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Example for our German speaking community: <a class="x_moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FStratification_(vegetation)%23%2Fmedia%2FFile%3AStockwerke_wald.png&data=04%7C01%7C%7C62e54e4818ba400117bb08d8d844ef7f%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637497137960879298%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=PaF1hZPTA3iie5QhITcaGrb%2F7QOgOMscoCsoy6RVFKM%3D&reserved=0" originalsrc="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratification_(vegetation)#/media/File:Stockwerke_wald.png" shash="u6WMRTVBMYEfJrul2HVm/1xqYtBNCoHhmgIco7ox5MiwSFJ7iBnWsWqYOwkIxhfjfXLUdH+9Bs2LlOb9mnSO8mQUBziGO5/M1DyCVpCGQEpup98ZelaUnOINMfyLGBYWHnTVf6QizzAZZTERH6QsyAR1AlBriBDZLFA5JfBICb8=">
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratification_(vegetation)#/media/File:Stockwerke_wald.png</a> and for the English speaking friends: "</font><font face="Verdana">The vertical stratification of a community is determined largely by the life forms of plants their
size , branching and leaves which is influenced by the vertical gradient of light. Vertical classification of vegetation in a forest showing the tree, shrub and herb layers and the forest floor", and yes, wikipedia is not the only resource I contacted. So
for scrub definitively, we need stratification. For shrubs, as being the human intervened version of it, we need stratification. For the common mapper, non botanists, non gardeners, we need stratification, we need to include the human intervention criteria.</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Feel free, and please, convince us of the contrary.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">I don't see any problem both in pronunciation and in writing between scrub and shrubs to distinguish one from the other. Anyway, maybe it is a good thing so users, ones they want to start using it, will go to our wiki to find out what
is the difference, being the human intervention criteria... ?</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Greetings,</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Bert Araali<br>
</font></p>
<div class="x_moz-cite-prefix">On 23/02/2021 22:33, Vincent van Duijnhoven wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"><style type="text/css" style="display:none">
<!--
p
{margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0}
-->
</style>
<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>
<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><font size="+1">@Martin:</font></p>
</blockquote>
<p><font size="+1"><br>
</font></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0">
<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>
<br>
<fieldset class="x_mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="x_moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a class="x_moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="x_moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.openstreetmap.org%2Flistinfo%2Ftagging&data=04%7C01%7C%7C62e54e4818ba400117bb08d8d844ef7f%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637497137960889256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=klB9leCgDR%2FLSUZu9%2BIP46xQWGBqE8%2BWjgGKET1eeHk%3D&reserved=0" originalsrc="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" shash="wnkqJPEsV1HecKz6uVGRuXSe/scsRzyYnTEfurv2hcbVLvqjBE35zDDFyDZoAvNJYgpA+VnHJpLhEq6/PsllOtHUBPJwujzPuNI//JsLGg4Spv4yHwdTCB7g9rVOUPMkcoIZ39i/3+swsoGxPG5lrw9wrR3ezS5U2a2iD+/sVHA=">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>