[Tagging] geology taggin?

Ulf Lamping ulf.lamping at googlemail.com
Sat Nov 13 11:40:32 GMT 2010


Am 13.11.2010 12:04, schrieb Morten Kjeldgaard:
>
> On 13/11/2010, at 09.27, John Smith wrote:
>
>> On 13 November 2010 15:38, Morten Kjeldgaard <mok at bioxray.dk> wrote:
>>> Yes, the landcover tag would be very useful in many instances, and quite
>>> orthogonal to landuse. Are you going to write a proposal for it, Martin?
>>
>> surface=* is currently used to denote the landcover information.
>
> Yes, for example surface=trees. Not very satisfactory is it? The
> landcover tag is necessary to bring OSM the next step along in
> development, and enables a detailed description for example useful in
> science and planning, vis-à-vis the multiple layers idea of Frederik Ramm.

How is landcover=trees any more helpful then widely used landuse / 
natural?!?
How is landcover orthogonal to landuse / natural?

BTW: There is *no* benefit of a new landcover tag compared to existing tags.

Please also have a look at the subject of this thread. This is about 
geology - trees are not part of that AFAIK.

Regards, ULFL



More information about the Tagging mailing list