[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse bush

[Vincent van Duijnhoven]

Maybe as an addition, that also removes the potential confusion between using the tags, natural, landuse or landcover. landuse and natural (and sometimes leisure) should be used to map a feature or use. Landcover should then be added as a secondary tag to describe the landcover (sort of on a broader scale). 

Landcover is also something that easily be added my mapping software automatically (depending on the values for landcover). Landuse=grass can automatically get the landcover=grass, place=ocean (area) can automatically get the landcover ocean and so on. Some features might require manual adding of the landcover tag because they are more complex.



6 feb. 2021 12:45 van tagging at openstreetmap.org:

> 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?
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210206/c22c7c86/attachment.htm>