<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 25/09/2017 13:36, SK53 wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAELijW-J+XJaMwvnAEU89uhpgWdsLgUOwsrHzZcMZHxigcsX+g@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">When this thread first started I thought we could
work to remove these multiple meanings, but having seen what
places with natural=heath from Corine imported-data in the
Cevennes, suspect that this is an unrealistic objective.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well just because one bad import used "Tag A" is not necessarily a
reason to not use "Tag A" elsewhere. If we did that we'd never use
highway=residential post-TIGER :)<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAELijW-J+XJaMwvnAEU89uhpgWdsLgUOwsrHzZcMZHxigcsX+g@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<p>The alternatives are to start sub-typing natural=heath, with
heath or heath:type. The main category to identify in the
short-term are the classic lowland heaths which are scarce
& threatened in the UK.</p>
<p>Wikipedia has a <a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaths_in_the_British_National_Vegetation_Classification_system"
moz-do-not-send="true">partial tabulation</a> of the formal
heath categories in the National Vegetation Classification,
which may help as background reading. I'm sure that pretty
much all communities in the U-group (calcifugous grassland
& montane), several Mires (e.g., M15 & M16), and even
some calcicolous upland grasslands are included in current
natural=heath.</p>
<p>At a more practical level the <a
href="http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/PDF/pub10_handbookforphase1habitatsurvey.pdf"
moz-do-not-send="true">JNCC Phase 1</a> guide recognises 6
heath categories, of which 4 are relatively common: wet &
dry heaths, and their respective mosaics with grassland.
Anything where the peat depth in the soil is NOT regarded as a
heath, but will be a Mire community (pennine moorland will be
largely blanket bog in this terminology).</p>
<p>Both <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:plant_community"
moz-do-not-send="true">NVC</a> & <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:habitat"
moz-do-not-send="true">Phase1</a> have relevant pages on the
wiki for (slightly) further info. NVC is clearly far too
technical for just about everyone, but Phase1 is probably
usable with a small bit of guidance. <br>
</p>
<p>Probably the best way to take this forward is to compile good
examples of places people are likely to know (particularly in
National Parks) which have a known classification AND a
reasonable number of usable images on Geograph. Wales is the
easiest place to do this because the whole of the country was
mapped using Phase1.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
What would be useful to me would be to know what questions I should
be asking myself to allow something tagged sensibly down the line?
Can they be reduced from the 11 pages in
"pub10_handbookforphase1habitatsurvey.pdf" that you linked to and
phrased in ways that I could actually understand ("Ulex europaeus,
Cytisus scoparius and Juniperus communis scrub" is something that
would make Oleksiy in the Latin "talk@" thread very happy, but it's
all greek to me!)?<br>
<br>
Best Regards,<br>
<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>