[Tagging] Forest vs Wood

[Rob Nickerson]

On 20 August 2014 18:45, Rob Nickerson <rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Wood: Woodland with no forestry
> Forest: Managed woodland or woodland plantation.
>
>
I think for me the wording isn't quite right. For me landuse=forest is
something that has been planted for the purpose of harvesting trees.
Therefore planting trees to prevent landslides, or to block road noise, or
to provide leisure is not a case of landuse=forest. Similarly simply
managing trees (even if by a national "Forestry Commission") for the
purpose of keeping an area safe to the public is not a case of
landuse=forest.

Perhaps a crop=tree tag would have made more sense than landuse=forest??

I quite like Imagico's idea (below). I think we should implement that and
then if in a year or so there is still a mess between landuse=forest and
natural=wood we should introduce a new tag (crop=trees which now provides
the overlay pattern) and treat landuse=forest and natural=wood as the same
thing.

"The orthogonality of natural=wood and landuse=forest SK53
<https://github.com/SK53> pointed out could be emphasized in rendering by
drawing only natural=wood as a solid color area and distinguish
landuse=forest with a different overlay pattern indicating the use for
forestry (some trees+piles of logs symbolism maybe)"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140820/7b27b07b/attachment.html>