[Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 32
st.niklaas at live.nl
Wed Aug 15 13:55:08 BST 2012
Hi,I followed the discussion about tagging a railway track or more. From a geografersvieuw its simple, the closer youll go the more youll see. The program hides all the extra info fi a 16 lanes highway or several railtracks aside. At first I want to see a track or road. After closing in Im interested in the complete pic.
> IMHO in OSM it would make sense to have several tags describing
> generic properties instead of having one single value with a very
> specific class.
> E.g. one tag might be vegetation=trees, shrubs, grass, "no", where
> "no" could follow the definition given by the FAO, i.e. "a total
> vegetative cover of less than 4% for at least 10 months of the year,
> or an absence of Woody or Herbaceous life forms and with less than 25%
> cover of Lichens/Mosses" which might sound complicated or lengthy, but
> for most of the places you find in the real world it would be easy
> because far from those limits)
IMHO is a grass covered area, temporarily, scrubbs and trees are covering it without care in an short period of time, whos tagging it again ? Why not nature as tag in nature reserve area 's. Just to avoid the immage Ive seen, with a large forest area and a view trees besides it. Tagged as beiing a group or a forest. You dont have to worry about the actually grow of the different plants if you use nature and forget if its 1,00 (grass), 3,00 (scrubbs)or 5,00 m (trees) high. Or is that to simple ? Greetz and keep mappingHendrik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging