[Tagging] The endless debate about "landcover" as a top-level tag
marc.gemis at gmail.com
Wed Jun 13 09:35:49 UTC 2018
Take a look at e.g.
You will see plenty of houses surrounded by landuse=forest. This is
because there are plenty of trees in the gardens near the house
(probably the area was a forest before).
The current mapping is not correct. There are gardens, driveways,
grassfields near the houses. However there are still patches with
My idea was to map the whole area as landuse=residential and the areas
covered with trees as landcover=trees.
But some people here say that you should map those trees with
landuse=forest. So should those lu=forest overlap the lu=residential ?
Similar problems exists where there is e.g. a meadow with several
trees on it (too many trees to map individually), but still the
purpose is meadow (e.g. because there are horses).
Do you draw a meadow and on top of it a lu=forest ?
As for the named area, I understand your reply as : you have a
separate object (perhaps the outer ring of the mult-polygon) with the
name tag (so any area excluded by the inner rings are still within
that named area). Any other tags you place on that outer ring
(place=locality perhaps ?)
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:47 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2018-06-13 9:44 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis <marc.gemis at gmail.com>:
>> * trees in gardens or in a meadow or any other area whose primary
>> function is not "trees" ( (using overlapping landuse ?)
> can you please rephrase this? It is not clear what you are asking.
>> * where the name of the forest has to be placed when one uses a
>> multi-polygon to exclude ponds from the tree covered areas.
> names always have to apply to the area or position where they apply to in the real world ;-)
> Whether to include or exclude areas from the named area depends on your interpretation of the world, there is no standard answer to this, you have to judge the actual situation. Generally I believe it would be safer to add names to "name objects" like place if there is no other well defined area like nature_reserve. Otherwise you will get into trouble when micromapping (e.g. splitting a forest would mean creating 2 forests).
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging