[Tagging] on the name of a tag for landcover

Stephen Hope slhope at gmail.com
Thu Aug 16 02:02:02 BST 2012

On 15 August 2012 21:15, David ``Smith'' <vidthekid at gmail.com> wrote:

> So why is a new tag or hierarchy needed? Are we just trying to standardize
> or formalize a presently-haphazard array of tags or values?

The problem at the moment is that we have two types of tags (landcover and
landuse) scattered throughout a whole bunch of categories. Even worse, we
have tags that are used as landuse=* that are not landuse type, but
landcover type. It makes explaining the difference and training people
close to impossible.

I personally don't care if we set up a landcover= tag or not, as long as we
get these tags out of the landuse= tag space.

Long version:

Landuse tags say what an area is used for - residential, retail, school,
park, military base, hospital etc.  As a general rule, there is only one
landuse tag covering a given area. Not all of these tags are of the form

Landcover tags say what is on a given part of ground - grass, sand, swamp,
etc, but also buildings, rivers, roads, sports pitches, gardens, fields
etc. Again, as a general rule, landcover areas don't overlap, though ways
will often be put through areas rather than split the area in two.

It's quite common and even expected for landcover and landuse tags to
overlap, however. A single landuse may contain many different landcover
tags - the school nearest my house has buildings, car parks, grass, sports
pitches, a farm area (animal paddock and crops), a sports hall, and that's
just what I can see from the road. It's still all one landuse of school,

This is confusing enough to mappers without having to say "some of the
landuse=* tags aren't actually landuse"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20120816/1647db1d/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list