[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse bush

[Warin]

On 5/2/21 7:52 pm, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:02:32PM +1100, Warin wrote:
>> On 4/2/21 8:48 am, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 03:29:22PM -0500, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>>>> I'm surprised to learn that people are using natural=scrub on landscaped
>>>> areas.  I was under the impression that natural=scrub is used for wild or
>>>> unmaintained areas, not intentional ornamental landscaping.
>>> People do so and they even overlap landuse with natural.
>>>
>>> I made myself a debug view for stuff like that and remove it. Either an area
>>> is natural or it is used e.g. landuse. But IMHO there cant be a natural
>>> in a landuse or vice versa.
>>
>> Ever hear of 'native forest logging"??? Where native forests are
>> harvested for their timber. And the native trees are replanted for
>> future harvesting.
>>
>> Note the key 'natural' is described as "describes natural physical
>> land features, including ones that have been modified or created by
>> humans." in the OSM wiki. I would prefer the key 'landcover' this
>> this, with other things in 'natural' being 'landforms' e.g. peak,
>> valley.
> For me its either used as a forest for logging - Then its a
> landuse=forest or its a nature reserve then its a natural=wood.
>
> It cant be both.
>
> F

We agree with tree cover being either landuse=forest when used for logging and other wise as natural=wood (or landcover=trees).


Ar sorry but for a combination of landuse and land cover I offer;

Some farmers have trees on parts of paddocks so livestock can shelter from sun/rain/etc.

So I see no issue with having a landuse and landcover patchwork where one over laps and/or is enclosed by the other.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210205/cff6178c/attachment.htm>