[Tagging] landcover=trees definition
jm at liotier.org
Mon Aug 10 10:29:49 UTC 2015
On 03/08/2015 09:20, christian.pietzsch at googlemail.com wrote:
> landcover=trees has it's origins in this proposal:
> The proposal wanted to seperate the phsyical landscape (landcover)
> from the cultural landscape (landuse). But the proposal never got the
> support it needed to get established.
A pity - I just happen to have a problem that this proposal would
solve... Take a look at this charming corner of Normandy:
On the left, a dense urban location that is clearly landuse=residential.
On the right, what is most definitely landuse=meadow. So what about the
center ? We see residential buildings among a predominantly grass
cover. In other areas, I have seen this mapped as landuse=meadow - but
it is wrong because it is actually used as a residential areal.
To me, it seems that mapping this area as a combination of
landuse=residential and landcover=grass would be most fitting. I have
thought about using the landuse=residential + natural=grass combination
instead, but those lawns do not strike me as natural.
What do you all think ? Is this a good illustration of the need for
More information about the Tagging