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

[Marc Gemis]

and from "maintained or managed woodland", to any group of trees,
because after all, trees on a community square, in a park and in a
garden are managed as well. At least that is an argument I have heard
before.
As soon as you start representing trees in a garden as landuse=forest
only because the trees are maintained, don't you drop the woodland
part (and thus landuse) and start using the tag as a landcover ?
Aren't you mapping for the renderer then ?

m
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 12:18 PM Christoph Hormann <osm at imagico.de> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 13 June 2018, Marc Gemis wrote:
> > > And landuse=forest is used for landcover, not landuse, so such
> > > mapping is correct.
> >
> > As I see it, it evolved from mapping areas where wood is used for
> > timber into a landcover tag. The first person that used it for
> > landcover purpose have mapped for the renderer imho. Others followed
> > and now people state it is a landcover tag.
>
> Not really following the overall discussion here any more but trying to
> scuttle the attempt at rewriting history:
>
> The early use of landuse=forest/natural=wood was more or less like
> Approach 3 on
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Forest
>
> See:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:landuse%3Dforest&oldid=200189
>
> in particular the section 'Attention'.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging