[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Ground: natural=bare_soil)

Joseph Eisenberg joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Mon Aug 3 21:17:18 UTC 2020

Everyone, the voting period for natural=bare_ground is still open for 4
more days.

I would recommend voting "no" on the current definition, unfortunately.

As mentioned above, the current definition is far too broad, and could
easily be construed to include areas under construction, areas of bare soil
due to use by people as a pathway or road area, and many sorts of arid and
semi-natural areas, including those that are partially covered by shrubs,
heath, grass or other sparse vegetation, or even areas of farmland that are
currently fallow.

Please see the discussion and objections on

I think it is a good idea to have a way to tag bare soil which is not sand
(natural=sand) or mostly stones (natural=shingle/scree) or mud, but we need
a clear, limited definition which does not fit with human-use areas like
roads, dirt parking lots, construction sites, abandoned quarries etc, and
there needs to be more consideration about when the tag should be used
instead of natural=heath and natural=scrub in arid regions where there are
scattered bushes.

For the proposal author, I would suggest mapping some local features in
your area which would fit the proposed definition, and then come back with
photos plus aerial imagery of the areas which ought to be mapped with this
tag. So far it has been mostly hypothetical, which makes it hard to
understand which sorts of landscapes would qualify for this tag.

- Joseph Eisenberg

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 5:58 AM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>

> sent from a phone
> > On 27. Jul 2020, at 13:41, Michael Montani <michael.montani at un.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > I eventually found on-the-ground images of the feature I would like to
> propose / map.
> are these suggested to be represented as polygons? How would the border be
> determined? I looks from the imagery as if there is a smooth transition of
> these „features“ and neighbouring land which isn’t completely bare. Did you
> try to map some of these and if yes, could you please post a link to an
> area where a few are mapped?
> Cheers Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200803/1445f024/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list