<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-06-20 17:30 GMT+02:00 Lester Caine <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lester@lsces.co.uk" target="_blank">lester@lsces.co.uk</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>The simple fact is that there is not a consistent structure for<br>
identifying 'landcover' on OSM and even natural=wood and landuse=forest<br>
make it difficult to decide what is naturally occurring and what is man<br>
made. <br></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div id=":6de" class=""> landuse=reservoir is a lot more practical where at times of the<br>
year the majority of the surface area is exposed. That is a totally man<br>
made situation for which 'natural' does not apply. </div></blockquote><div><br><br>generally, reading "natural=*" as "made by mother nature" is a bogus
interpretation in my view. It is just a kind of feature-group
(geographical / landscape feature) for things.<br><br><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 id=":6de" class="">And when moving onto<br>
areas like marinas which take several forms including basins on the<br>
waterway system, including land elements as 'retail' or 'residential'<br>
and water elements as waterway tags as part of the Relation:waterway.<br>
But the overall area's landuse is marina even if we currently tag it as<br>
leisure=marina without any agreement as to just what area that should cover.<br></div></blockquote><div><br><br></div><div>the tag should cover the whole marina, is this difficult to apply? <br><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div id=":6de" class="">
<br>
It's the insistence that water only applies to natural elements which<br>
just does not fit properly, and man_made=reservoir while much more<br>
accurate does not fit in with a consistent landcover/landuse overlay?</div></blockquote></div><br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">man_made=reservoir would be an option for reservoirs (nothing I would introduce, just another tag for what already has 2 alternative mapping methods).<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">What do you mean by "consistent landcover/landuse overlay"? Those are orthogonal concepts, with often different boundaries, displaying both (all of it) at the same time will most likely lead to un unreadable map.<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Cheers,<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Martin<br></div></div>