[Tagging] Fuzzy areas again: should we have them or not?

[Anders Torger]

Forgot to mention that this example also shows the issue where a named 
forest section actually should be split with different tags. Inside the 
national park there's natural=wood, but outside there is landuse=forest. 
I have not yet mapped that as precisely though, so now it can be a 
single polygon. The current best solution for the split is to name both 
polygons the same (see the wetland thread a while back), but they cannot 
belong to the same multipolygon as the tags differ, so you get two 
names.

If there was a possibility to layer a forest name as a new polygon on 
top of the actual landcover polygons, it would be much easier to manage 
though, and as we have such areas in other situations (as the approved 
but not rendered peninsula tag) it seems like that could be a way 
forward. But as said, it's a controversial subject, and the peninsula 
tag has gotten a lot of flak too.

On 2020-12-22 13:01, Anders Torger wrote:

> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12029528#map=14/66.8042/20.1197
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201222/f88b161d/attachment.htm>