[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse bush

[Vincent van Duijnhoven]

I think I'm misunderstood due to the wrong word choice.

Of course not, an ocean should be mapped and renderd, and you are correct most of the ocean has no (mappable) use. I wanted to say that in essence, every square meter of the earth has a feature or use that can be described. With an ocean, you are describing a feature (the ocean). You probably tag it using a place=ocean, natural=water| bay or so. There are also forest where you can describe the forest (as a landscape feature) as natural=wood or maybe natural=grassland for other areas. There are also areas where you more accurately tag the use like for example with farmland or residential. You can also have for example leisure=garden | park to describe the feature or use. These are what primarily should be rendered (on carto).

As secondary tags, you have the tag landcover=*. That describes the landcover. For example, landuse=residential can be landcover=urban and natural=wood can be landcover=forest | needle-leaved forest. 

That is why I said that landcover (the tag) should never be rendered on carto because you should use tags like landuse or natural instead to describe the feature or use and the tag landcover as a secondary tag. There should I think be no drawn area on OSM that only has a landcover tag but rather for example a natural or landuse tag as primary tag. And for some areas, there might not yet be a good tag to describe the feature or use. A large road may be splitting two areas of forest. You draw the road as a line so there is an area gab between the two forest patches. That can then be fixed by proposing new tags to describe these features or use.

You can have an entirely new map style "OpenStreetMap landcover" or so that renders the landcover tags. Then you get something similar like the landcover maps I showed.
Does that make more clear what I meant to say?

6 feb. 2021 12:07 van 61sundowner at gmail.com:

> On 5/2/21 10:19 pm, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 at 10:33, Vincent van          Duijnhoven via Tagging <>> tagging at openstreetmap.org>> >          wrote:
>>
>>> We get a bit of topic but imo, a piece of land always                has a function or design ("inrichting" in Dutch). For                some, functions, there is still no proper tag like a                potential landuse=highway. That it is not known to the                mapper does not mean it has no function. I think that                landcover therefore should never be rendered on carto                but always serve as a secondary tag. It should never be                the only tag on an area because the use is not known.
>>>
>>
>> There are a lot of patches of trees in my part of the            world.  Some large, some
>> small, some very large.  They are quite clear on aerial            imagery.  They are very
>> visible from nearby roads, tracks and footpaths.  They            are things one can
>> use to help ascertain one's position: there should be a            large patch of
>> trees over there.
>>
>> The problem is, I don't know from aerial imagery or (in            many cases)
>> from the ground whether they are growing because the            ground is too wet
>> for crops or for forestry or some other purpose.             According to you, I
>> shouldn't map these clearly visible features because I            don't know
>> what they're used for.
>>
>> I find your ideas about cartography to be less than            useful.
>>
>
>
>
>
> Vincent.. OSM does not state what the oceans of the world are      used for. So these, according to you, should not be rendered? 
>
>
>
>
>
> Sorry but land cover can be seen easily, if not in imagery then      by survey. So this is easily entered into OSM, and easily      verified. 
>
>
> Land use can be far more difficult to determine, even when      surveyed at ground level.
>
>
>
>
>
> For OSM as the data base land cover and land use should be      included - without requiring both to be present for all areas of      the world. 
>
>
> Rendering is an issue for those using OSM data. 
>
>
> It is not for OSM to put restrictions on data entry other than      trying to keep the data in some semblance of order and restraining      vandalism. 
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210206/0e645cd1/attachment.htm>