[HOT] Bolivian Floods: "landuse=forest" or "natural=wood"?

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Mon Feb 10 03:23:54 UTC 2014

There are multiple schemes used for natural=wood vs landuse=forest, so
either use is just as valid.


From: hyances at gmail.com [mailto:hyances at gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 6:34 PM
Subject: [HOT] Bolivian Floods: "landuse=forest" or "natural=wood"?


Hi hotties!


Some of us are tracing polygons over tree areas, ones are using
"landuse=forest" others "natural=wood" ¿which you consider more indicated?
Mapping trees could be helpful for high level floods.


By the way, trying to give answer to question below, I'm wondering about the
best communication channel to gather all mappers of the task, when they are
comming form diferent countries and talk-xx mailing list, some could be
missing information and sharing knwoledge about best mapping practices is a
key factor for quality data (specially remote one); so experienced mappers
could guide newers.


Just arise the idea to include a chat in task page




But, in present ¿any suggestion?




Humberto Yances


(copy from OSM inbox)

<http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/nyampire> nyampire

10 febrero 2014 a las 01:43

Hello, exactory. I think so too.

I wrote them as same as surrounding "landuse=forest"s. But must be
represented as "natural=forest".

Did you contact other mappers already?


On 2014-02-10 01:36:21 UTC Humberto_Yances wrote:

Hi, Same as you I'm currently mapping on task 418 and kidly want to comment
about using "landuse=forest" to map tree areas. It looks more as
"natural=wood", beacause is not a manmade tree farming; just natural free
grow trees.



Humberto Yances

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20140209/5d3e93fb/attachment.html>

More information about the HOT mailing list