[Tagging] on the name of a tag for landcover

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Mon Aug 13 10:44:57 BST 2012

On 08/13/12 11:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> +1, the FAO system seems quite elaborated (might be too
> detailed/complicated/long for OSM, not sure,

Anything used for OSM must enable someone who knows shit about biology 
and geology to make a meaningful contribution (that does not make him 
feel like he's completely useless because he could only fill in 2% of 
the blanks).

Too often, tagging discussion is driven by the wet dreams of specialists 
in one field or the other ("wouldn't it be great it volunteers the world 
over would record the soil acidity? imagine what we could do with that 

Remember that it has so far been impossible to educate people to even 
differentiate between landuse=forest and natural=wood.

Anything that contains the word "herbaceous" is, however attractive to 
someone working in the field, is very likely not suitable for OSM.

Of course enthusiasts can use specialist tags to record esoteric stuff, 
but I fear that many people believe that such tags, if "adopted", would 
automatically enter the mainstream and their filling out be requested 
from everyone who adds data, when indeed our presets are often too 
crowded already.


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

More information about the Tagging mailing list