[Tagging] geology taggin?

"Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" xificurk at gmail.com
Tue Nov 16 02:49:25 GMT 2010


M∡rtin Koppenhoefer napsal(a):
> 2010/11/16 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>:
>> I've already been tagging beaches and other areas as surface=sand, how
>> does using landcover make this any better?
> 
> 
> I agree that in this case it is the same. For trees it is different.
> surface=tree doesn't make any sense. Should we put some landcover
> values in surface and some in landcover?
> 
> We could reserve surface to roads, squares and paths.

The problem with surface is that it is currently proposed (and used) to
describe two different things:
1) A property of certain object, which can be area, way, node...
2) What is on the surface of certain _area_ of land ("landcover").

Although there is currently no big overlap between usage (1) and (2) on
areas, I think it would be better to differentiate these two use cases,
so one can easily e.g. filter out and render only landcover map.

Another advantage of specialized tag "landcover" is that in contrast
with surface it by itself implies area=yes.

Petr

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 261 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20101116/bffbb134/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Tagging mailing list