[Tagging] Mapping deforestation
pelderson at gmail.com
Tue Mar 12 00:02:36 UTC 2019
Organized mapping is ok mapping. Mapping of landcover has been pretty decent and sensible overall, not a bunch of fanatics, no data destruction. I’ve described current mapping practice for landcover=grass and landcover=trees. It covers most of the usage including the Paraguay mapping project.
It’s a movement, not a conspiracy. It’s growing despite not being rendered.
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 12 mrt. 2019 om 00:19 heeft Christoph Hormann <osm at imagico.de> het volgende geschreven:
>> On Monday 11 March 2019, Peter Elderson wrote:
>> Sorry, 2000.
> IIRC the saying is "two wrongs does not make a right".
> Original use of tags with the landcover key, that is mappers creating a
> new geometry with a landcover tag, is as follows (based on data from
> 72848 ways/relations (more of half of these created in organized mapping
> with tagging not being the free choice of the mapper)
> 1310 different users
> 494 of which have used the key exactly once (this, i.e. that about 1/3
> to half of the genuine active users of a tag have only used it once is
> pretty standard but still this has to be kept in mind when
> contemplating such numbers)
> The reason why taginfo reports only the number of users who have last
> touched features with this key is not because this is particularly
> meaningful information but because this can be counted quite easily
> when processing a planet file (which is what taginfo does on a daily
> basis) while numbers on active users (i.e. who maps features with a tag
> or who adds a tag to features) can only be determined from the history.
> I can highly recommend Frederik's talk on the matter of OSM statistics
> which discusses this in detail:
> Christoph Hormann
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging