[Tagging] British term for municipal greenery?
kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com
Wed Jun 6 00:35:52 UTC 2018
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> wrote:
> I imagine that
> - people that use landuse=grass, landuse=forest/wood, natural=scrub
> since it renders, would be willing to use landuse=[something appropriate],
> landcover=grass|trees|scrub|... if it would render
> - people that use landcover=... (and don't care about empty spots on the
> map), would not mind if it rendered and might be persuaded to add a
> collective landuse=[something appropriate] if it adds a nice green default
> - people that use landuse=village_green since it renders, would not
> object to using a correct landuse instead, if it has about the same nice
> green default rendering.
> - people that map it as leisure=garden could be persuaded to use a
> landuse type instead, if it has a nice default rendering and the extra to
> specify whats on it
> - I do not foresee much support for public:green=yes, it adds unnecessary
> - man_made=*, I don't know. Everything in Nederland is man_made, and it
> doesn't apply to how the land is used or covered. Seems more appropriate
> for constructed objects, I don't see anyone replacing all motorway-lining
> fake-orchards with man_made=???
I would very much like to have both available. landuse is not landcover
(and neither necessarily aligns with protected area boundaries or with
other cadastre, which is another thing).
I have many cases locally where landuse and landcover are inconsistent.
For example 'landuse=forest' is appropriate, I think, for lands entitled
State Forest and managed long-term for forest products, wildlife
management, and recreation. Nevertheless, portions of the State Forests
may be natural=scrub (which should probably be landcover) because they are
recently harvested, or be natural=water because that's where the beavers
are currently in residence, or be landcover=bare_rock because of recent
avalanches where the soil has not yet replenished itself. The land's
designated USE is still 'forest', even though the land's COVER may be such
that it will be decades before the use is productive.
Many of the 'natural=*' features ought also to be 'landcover' because
otherwise, there are endless arguments about what's a 'natural' wood,
grassland, or other similar feature, as opposed to a 'managed' one. Around
here the areas that are closest to a 'natural' state are that way only
because of intensive management to keep them 'untrammelled by the hand of
And speaking of beavers, 'man_made=dam' seems a little odd - but there are
some beaver ponds around here that have been relatively stable for many
years and ought to have their dams mapped - and that's the best I can come
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging