[HOT] Groups/areas of Trees=> leisure=park?
miketho16 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 29 21:12:50 UTC 2016
Thanks, that is what I thought. I am not adding trees, I just noticed
someone else had and they had tagged them in a manner that didn't match the
common practice as I understand it.
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Vao Matua <vaomatua at gmail.com> wrote:
> I would suggest that natural=wood should be the first tag, if the area is
> a park then the next tag could be leisure=park. The OSM page on forest
> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dforest>has good
> In Ethiopia often the Orthodox churches are in the middle of a small
> church forests and would be tagged natural=wood, and land_use=religious.
> I love trees but would shy away from tagging individual trees except for
> landmark type specimen. There is a lot of mapping to do without mapping
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Mike Thompson <miketho16 at gmail.com>
>> In #1544 (or in any HOT project) are we marking areas that are covered in
>> trees as leisure = park? Although it is not universally agreed upon, the
>> tendency in the rest of OSM is to tag these as natural=wood. See for
>> example . Also, individual trees (represented as nodes) are tagged the
>> same way and normally those would be tagged natural=tree.
>>  http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/1544#task/67
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the HOT