[Tagging] landuse=clearing

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Sun Jul 29 14:28:01 UTC 2018


On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:

I too have created relations for tree areas and made 'holes' in them for
> various things. Some of those 'holes' may
>
well be 'bare map'.
>
[...]

> The problem with the present data in this area is that;
>
> a) it does not render so 'we' don't know it is there by looking at the
> rendered map.
>

That's the only problem.  Your points b and c aren't problems (well, not
the problem at immediate issue), they're
the reasons why problem "a" exists.


> I could add a tag - say a "comment=from HOT contribution, tagged
> landuse=clearing" .. that should suffice.
>

You could do that.  You could even retain the landuse=clearing tag, since
it does no real harm, and comment that
you've retained it in case it has local meaning that isn't documented on
the wiki.  Or you could do none of those things
and just incorporate the area, with no tags, into a multipolygon on the
basis that is clearly what was intended.

If you wanted, you could also add a fixme stating that the nature of the
clearing needs to be determined, so that
people who look at validators might be tempted to go and look.


> In OSM 'we' try to tag what is on the ground, "landuse=clearing" to me
> means a lack of something - not what is there, but what is not there.  And
> that is not something I'd even think about trying to render.
>

Landuse=clearing in the middle of woodland means "not trees" and can be
rendered by using a multipolygon to prevent
trees rendering in that area.  It would be nice to know what actually is
there, but at least you can show that trees
aren't there.

A rambling diversion here, that will rejoin the main trail at the end.  In
the 1920s Alfred Korzybski came up with
a self-improvement/therapy program he called "General Semantics" (nothing I
say here should be taken as an
endorsement of it).  It had a key point to remind people that our knowledge
and understanding of reality is only
an approximation to reality: "The map is not the territory."  OSM is only
an approximation to the real world.  I try
to improve that approximation, where possible.

Sea everywhere is an approximation.  An island in the sea is a better
approximation.  Adding woodland to the island
is a better approximation than that.  Poking a hole in the woodland is an
even better approximation.  Tagging what
that clearing is (scrub/grass/rock/whatever) is an even better
approximation.  I don't let the fact that I can't achieve
perfection stop me from improving what is there.  I'd have changed that
landuse=clearing to an inner in a
multipolygon without bothering to say anything here.  If the imagery had
contradicted the tagging, I'd have left it
alone, but if the imagery shows "not trees" then map "not trees."

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180729/1dc1a6ef/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list