[Tagging] Golf wiki page

Alan Grant alangrant72 at gmail.com
Mon Jul 16 20:31:05 UTC 2018

But why do these discussions/controversies/ambiguities matter for golf
courses? Are we talking about how to tag areas of tree cover that may exist
between the fairways and greens?

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 22:21, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 9:00 PM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 3:46 PM Mateusz Konieczny
>> <matkoniecz at tutanota.com> wrote:
>> > landuse=forest in OSM is for tree-covered area, not for area used for
>> logging-related purposes
>> And we will keep having this discussion as long as there is no tag
>> that denotes the latter that doesn't get repurposed for the former.
> As I recall (recollection may be flawed) the last go-round, the following
> seemed to be the case:
> 1) landuse=forest was intended for forestry, but the value (forest) was
> badly chosen.  Growing trees to be logged
> is a use of the land.
> 2) landcover=trees wasn't currently rendered (my recollection may be
> particularly bad on that).
> 3) Because landuse=forest is badly named (should have been forestry) and
> therefore misleading, and because
> landcover=trees isn't rendered, landuse=forest was being used for two
> things.
> 4) Usual arguments about what constitutes a forest versus a wood and other
> noise as the whole thread
> degenerated.
> My take on it: tag trees for logging purposes as landuse=forestry (note
> spelling) and trees not for logging
> purposes as landcover=trees or natural=wood as preferred (we can have that
> argument another time).  Then
> change the wiki to say that landuse=forest is deprecated because it gets
> misunderstood and misused, and point
> to the alternatives.  Introducing two new tags that supersede an existing
> tag used ambiguously is the only hope of
> making this sort of thing work.
> Landuse=forestry is less likely to be misused because "forestry" means
> logging and because we'd have
> landcover=trees (which might even constitute something named "XYZ Forest".
> None of this stands a chance of happening unless OSM Carto agrees to
> implement landuse=forestry and
> landcover=trees.  People don't use tags that don't render.  Well, for
> small, specialized things they do, but for big
> areas of trees they won't.  OSM Carto often won't implement new tags
> because they're not used much; people don't
> use new tags that don't render.  Rinse, wash, repeat.  What a shame we
> don't have a forum like a mailing list where
> we could all agree on sensible things to do and then they happen.
> --
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180716/0cea1395/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list