[Tagging] New page "Approval status" for "de facto", "in use", "approved" etc
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Jul 29 09:27:29 UTC 2019
Am Mo., 29. Juli 2019 um 11:11 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com>:
> But then I checked the other values of denotation=, eg
> denotation=urban, denotation=avenue, =landmark, =natural_monument.
> Boy, that's a mess. The whole key was poorly thought out.
> It looks like many mappers don't realize that database users can find
> natural=tree within landuse=residential/commercial/retail to find
> urban trees, or within leisure=park for park trees, or search within
> 10 m of a highway, etc.
I am adding denotation=avenue to trees that are planted to form an avenue,
because you can filter trees within some distance from a road, but not all
of them are there to form an avenue, they could simply be trees close to a
road (but a human would not regard them as part of an avenue). Species,
size and position come into play, something that might be automatically
recognizable with an elaborated system, but it would have to be more
complex than just "within x meters from a road".
Landmark and natural_monument can probably only with additional knowledge
be tagged correctly.
Urban may seem kind of superfluous, agreed (in theory it allows for
detailed mapping of urban trees even in the absence of landuse, roads and
other features, but in reality this will hardly ever happen).
> I've added some comments about the necessity and verifiability of
> these tags (landmark and natural_monument seem to be subjective
> opinions about the importance of a tree, unless in some places there
> are official landmark or monument trees, but this isn't possible to
I can confirm that in Italy and Germany (and likely elsewhere) there are
individual trees which are designated natural monuments (by "law") and
which are mapped with these tags.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging