[Tagging] RFC: new key Landcover

Peter Wendorff wendorff at uni-paderborn.de
Tue Nov 16 19:45:20 GMT 2010

Am 16.11.2010 18:48, schrieb Richard Welty:
> On 11/16/10 12:43 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> no, that would be surface as well. I'd say the distinction is between
>> the surface and the coverage (which comprises the surface).
>> surface=bush or tree would not make any sense IMHO. surface=asphalt is
>> fine for the surface, the landcover would be the street which is not
>> only the surface of the street.
> my attempt at clarification: surface is used where the mapped
> entity is man-made (or modified, e.g. dirt roads.)
While I understand, what you mean, there is a weakness in that logic:
A path in the wood made by humans is man-made - so you would tag it e.g. 
as surface=dirt; but if it's made by animals on their way to the water, 
it's landcover=dirt?

On the other hand the "Lüneburger Heide" in Germany is man-made some 100 
years ago by exploitation of the woods (kept as it is by extensive sheep 
pasturing). So here it's surface?

Just for further thinking about.


More information about the Tagging mailing list