[HOT] Trees

[john whelan]

I'm happy and content and they are much easier to map than buildings but I
just wondered if there was any logic behind it other than they had grown
tired of mapping buildings.

Thanks John

On 12 November 2014 19:14, Blake Girardot <bgirardot at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't think you missed anything in the Project instructions for
> individual trees. But with the missing maps project, OSMGeoWeek and other
> assorted welcome to mapping type events it just be someone who thought it
> would be fun to map in a few trees. I saw a couple of those recently when
> doing some validation.
>
> So that is my guess: Someone just wanted to map in some trees for fun
> and/or experimentation with mapping, tagging and/or rendering. As Bob Ross
> might ask: "Who doesn't like happy little trees?"
>
> Cheers
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 6:45 PM, john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I know they're nice but why would anyone spend time mapping trees rather
>> than buildings in a HOT area?  Or did I miss something in the tasks?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20141112/99337e83/attachment.html>