[Tagging] What do others call this?
vpottier at gmail.com
Tue Aug 10 08:45:35 BST 2010
On 10/08/2010 03:13, Liz wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, Steve Bennett wrote:
>> Wish there was an agriculture=* tag. Life could be simple:
> well living in an agricultural area
> I'd start with
agriculture=* is not very acurate
Does it describe the use of the soil, the production of a farm ?
Maybe it is enough for urban poeple, but not for micromapping.
A meadow never produces milk, but a farm.
A vineyard never produces wine, but a winery...
The culture on a field may change often, but the production of a farm
So I think better to use the tags landuse and produce.
On 10/08/2010 07:31, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:32 AM, John Smith<deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 10 August 2010 11:30, Richard Welty<rwelty at averillpark.net> wrote:
>>> not sure it's wise to try and tag for crop types. many farms
>>> do rotate their crops, after all. not the same from year to year,
>>> and all that.
>> In the area I grew up in they rotated twice a year in some cases...
> True, you wouldn't want to try and tag that. However certain types of
> agriculture like vineyards are much more permanent.
> So maybe it is appropriate to leave them as landuse:
> Presumably a basic distinction between pasture, crops, grapes, and any
> kind of tree (orchards, hazelnuts...) would be meaningful and not
> change too quickly. Even that might not be maintainable though, since
> by definition agricultural areas have low population density (and very
> low OSM mapper density...)
The question is also : where do we put the tag ?
If the tag is on a polygon (field or ...), we describe what is on the
floor : the landuse=orchard|vinyard|farm|... is good with trees=*
On a building, on a site, the tag
produce=wine|rice|flowers|milk|vegetables|fruits|... shoud be appropriate
I think this way is more stable.
More information about the Tagging