[Tagging] The endless debate about "landcover" as a top-level tag
Warin
61sundowner at gmail.com
Wed Jun 13 07:14:24 UTC 2018
On 13/06/18 16:03, Peter Elderson wrote:
> Would it be possible to get the osm-community in Belgium to agree on
> one tagging principle for trees/wood/forest?
> And get it done that way?
>
> 2018-06-13 7:47 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis <marc.gemis at gmail.com
> <mailto:marc.gemis at gmail.com>>:
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 10:57 PM Mateusz Konieczny
> <matkoniecz at tutanota.com <mailto:matkoniecz at tutanota.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 12. Jun 2018 13:22 by marc.gemis at gmail.com
> <mailto:marc.gemis at gmail.com>:
> >
> > How do people in GIS know how many square meter of forest there
> is in
> > a country based on OSM-data ?
> >
> >
> > I would start from something like: total area of area covered by
> >
> > landuse=forest and natural=wood
> >
> > after excluding very small areas.
> >
> >
>
> won't work, see e.g.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=waasmunster#map=16/51.1215/4.0932&layers=N
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=waasmunster#map=16/51.1215/4.0932&layers=N>
> that's not a forest, that are a lot of private gardens with trees
> in it.
>
Exclude area with landuse=residential ??
>
>
> >
> > Is the data suited for that ?
> >
> >
> > Depends on (a) where (b) what kind of accuracy is needed, forest
> in many regions
> >
> > are unmapped or partially mapped.
> >
> >
> >
> > How can I find those places with OSM data ?
> >
> >
> > What you exactly want to find?
>
>
> A forest is a place where you can walk, ride, cycle. Not someones
> private backyard.
> Our government talks often about there is so many square meter of
> forest in Belgium.
> It's not sufficient to subtract all small areas, you need to subtract
> somehow everything that is not a forest (see above)
>
> >
> >
> >
> > I thought I had an answer for all the above questions when
> > natural=wood, landuse=forest, landcover=trees where used "properly".
>
And you might consider landuse=logging too ...
>
> >
> >
> > No, you cant. As there are conflicting tagging methods
>
> If everything was "properly" mapped with those 3 tags I could come up
> with an algorithm. Not with the current mess of course.
>
Proper? Who says what is proper?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180613/dc5dabd6/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Tagging
mailing list