[Tagging] The endless debate about "landcover" as a top-level tag

Kevin Kenny kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com
Fri Jun 8 15:35:32 UTC 2018


On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:37 PM, Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com>
wrote:

> This is not 'deprecating' landuse=forest - -
>
> it's still there, it can be there indefinitely, it can render correctly.
>
>
> It is exactly deprecating it - see for example
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprecation
>
> "In several fields, *deprecation* is the discouragement of use of some
> terminology, feature,
> design, or practice, typically because it has been superseded or is no
> longer considered
> efficient or safe, without completely removing it or prohibiting its use. "
>
>
'Deprecation' when applied to features of computer programs usually
indicatesan eventual intent to de-support them and a warning that they may
be de-supported. I'm not in any way asserting that landuse=forest ought not
to be used, merely suggesting that users be warned that the
natural-language meaning might be misleading. It's not unsafe, it's not
inefficient, it's perfectly acceptable to use it with its current meaning -
but it does not describe a land use, it describes a land cover, and if a
land use is intended, a different tag is needed.

I had not realized that you object to 'deprecation' in so broad a sense
that it comprises even a mild warning that 'landuse=forest' is a term of
art in OSM that might not match the natural-language meaning.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180608/80d2e73d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list