[Tagging] Refining landcover/natual landuse WAS Re: A name for stony ground?

Johan Jönsson johan.j at goteborg.cc
Sat Sep 3 20:05:25 BST 2011

Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at ...> writes:

> <snip>
> in the second phase (they call it the modular/hierarchical phase) they do:
> I surface aspect
> II macropattern
> landform,climate
> altitude,erosion,vegetation
> soil type/lithology
> cheers,
> Martin
> PS: The FAO document is really interesting, what do you think about a
> tag "vegetation_structure" to be applied to vegetated areas like
> meadow, scrub and forest with the suggested values "open" and
> "closed"? This is inspired by this scheme:
> http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/X0596E/X0596e13.gif
> and could help to differentiate between woodlands and dense forests or
> between thickets and shrubland. It could also be used on beaches (some
> of them are bare, others have sparse vegetation, e.g. there could be
> "vegetation_structure=open" and "vegetation_structure=none" (where
> "none" could include also be very sparse vegetation, almost not
> present) and in mountaineous regions (where there is often areas which
> are mixed pebbles and grass).
> Another key to indicate the same could be "vegetation_density" with
> values "dense" "sparse" (or "low").
> Obviously this would also require to define that it is related to the
> main vegetation form, i.e. the one in the "landuse" (or "landcover")
> key.
I took a look at the FAO-scheme a while ago and came up with this example for a
I)   (SEMI) natural vegetation
II)  Woody
III) Trees
IV)  closed
V)   broadleaved
VI)  deciduous



I went with one main key having 3 values (tree/shrub/grassland), indicating
existence of that type.
main vegetation-type is not identified directly, instead one have to further tag
each type with further info. From the distribution(or density) of each type a
renderer could decide what graphics to use. 

/Johan Jönsson

More information about the Tagging mailing list