[Tagging] geology taggin?
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Nov 15 09:46:01 GMT 2010
2010/11/15 Craig Wallace <craigw84 at fastmail.fm>:
> On 14/11/2010 20:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> 2010/11/14 Craig Wallace<craigw84 at fastmail.fm>:
>>>> BTW: There was exactly *no* good example, which real world problem could
>>>> be solved with landcover that can't be done with: surface, natural
>>>> and/or landuse.
>>> I think it would help with the mess of natural=wood vs landuse=forest.
>>> eg if I see an area of trees, I don't know whether or not it is "natural"
>>> "managed". Best to just have a tag that says this land is covered with
>>> trees. Then you can add extra tags for how managed it is (if you know
>>> plus tag what type of trees it is, and what it is used for etc.
>>> So I think a tag of something like landcover=trees would be very useful.
>> I'm actually already doing this: landcover=tree. There is already 2545
>> entities of them in the db. You could still use a different surface
>> there by the way, so it is not superfluous.
>> Also landcover=scree, grass, ice, sand
>> are good values IMHO. Probably we should simply start using them.
> I think it would make more sense to use the plural, ie landcover=trees. As
> it for tagging an area covered by a number of trees, and would avoid
> confusion with natural=tree, which is for tagging individual trees.
While I agree with this, there is still the fact that 100% of all
already existing 2545 landcover-tree objects in the db are tagged with
tree, 0 with trees. If someone has a bot running, maybe he could
change landcover=tree to landcover=trees?
More information about the Tagging