[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse bush

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, 6 Feb 2021 at 11:48, Vincent van Duijnhoven via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
[...]

>
> 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.
>

There are two problems with this.

The first is that tags have evolved rather than being designed from scratch,
so we have many anomalies.  It is not always the case that what you think of
as a primary tag is natural=* or landuse=* but is landcover=*.  This is
undesirable, but it's how things are.

The second is that it is often hard to classify mappable objects into
what you consider to be primary keys.  Not just from aerial
imagery but also on the ground.  I can see trees but I don't know if
they grew naturally and are part of the woodland that once covered
most of the area or if they were planted for logging.  I don't know if
they are there because the ground is on a steep slope that
makes agricultural use impossible, or because the ground is
waterlogged, or whatever.  I don't know anything but "here
be trees."  Your insistence that they should then not show
up on carto because I can't meet your ideas of
Platonic essence of tagging is not something I agree
with.

In an ideal world with ideal tagging and ideal mappers, I
might agree with you.  We have none of those things and
your proposal merely wipes much off the map with no
gain.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210206/702666bb/attachment.htm>