[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse bush

[Vincent van Duijnhoven]

I just had a discussion with Brian on the topic. Is it an idea to instead of introducing landuse=shrub, extend the natural=scrub with a new tag scrub=wild|decorative? This better describes the type of scrub than denotation=* or managed=*.

As explained by Bert Araali, natural=scrub is currently already used to tag the kind of decorative scrub as illustrated in my proposal for landuse=shrub. By adding a new tag to natural=scrub, all that work does not need to be changed. An advantage is that already gets rendered on carto. The wiki then needs to be changed to address this broader definition of scrub and that natural=scrub can be further defined with scrub=wild|decorative.

Any thoughts on this?

Greetings,
Vincent


14 feb. 2021 14:06 van bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com:

>
> Hi Vincent,
>
>
>
> I actually didn't mean an extension of the        use of natural=scrub.  In many areas across the world it is        already used in the same context. For instance here in Africa we        have a lot of bushes planted in parks, golf cources, urban areas        etc...  They are mostly all tagged as natural=scrub and is a        tagging habbit grown  In most cases they are managed through        clipping, weeding etc... although, due to the fact we don't do        it that often, they might look "unmanaged".
>  > If you mean with native english speakers UK and US, they      don't relate the term scrub to shrub and bushes in built up areas,      your reasoning might be correct. Other "native" English speaking      areas, like here in Africa and Australia have another      interpretation of the term "bush" in daily use. As we try to find      a global consensus, the term scrub seems to cover the targeted      vegetation type.>  Using the term "uncultivated land" in it's definition is not wrong      but needs to be clarified, to my interpretation it refers to the      land the vegetation grows upon. Of course I agree completely that      we need to extend the wiki, ad mre examples and clarify the true      meaning of scrub, both within and outside of OSM.
>
>
>
>
> You understood my reasoning in regard to landuse. The landuse      refers to the land the scrub grows upon, and in most cases, as we      look at just the English meaning of "uncultivated land", it is      suitable in its current state to be used with the examples given      in the proposal.  If you follow the OSM guidleines, one item, one      tagging scheme, in most cases you will have a larger landuse area      containing several or even, overlapping areas to detail the      vegetation growing upon it. Same as is already common with      natural=wood or natural=grass, same as for the less used      natural=heath. Same as for landcover which gets some support but      is less commonly used in this context and due to it's history a      bit controversy. I tried to keep in mind to offer a proposal which      is usable for all kinds of users, cultures etc.. in the world and      OSM. The majority of the mappers are not academics, neither      cartographers, and that is a good thing and one of the reasons if      you allow me to say so, Africans feel at home and comfortable to      contribute here.
>  
>  In regard to managed and denotation, neither of them would be a      "required" tag. I added it as a proposal to add more context in      the significance, purpose or use, whatever someone wants to call      it, as it was clearly a need within the original proposal.      Denotation, I agree seems to be a suitable candidate and gaining      support.  Of course we need to take care the wiki gets updated and      extend denotation to be used also with natural=scrub and add some      usable proposed values.
>
>
>
> Managed is an approved key but poorly used. I mentioned it to      promote using more attribution of top level tags to provide      detailed information instead of creating or proposing top level      keys.  Much in the same way to avoid a situation and confusion      like with forest and wood. As others have already said, managed      describes the process of how the scrub, bush or shrub is managed,      including maintained. But if you allow me, personally I prefer to      have that discussion in a new and separate thread. A simple yes/no      doesn't describe the management process clearly, as not      maintaining, let vegetation in the broader context, grow freely is      also a management strategy. Maintaining, with or without defining      more details, is another management strategy. 
>
>
> I would like to clarify that I am not the writer of this proposal      or a moderator of this thread or talk group. Just want to help to      streamline the discussion. I like to consider everyone's view and      address the whole community so we finally can come to a consensus      and advise to the writer of the proposal or find someone to extend      or clarify our wiki, which can be anyone feeling comfortable with      the matter and I would be happy to help with..
>
>
> Greetings, Bert Araali
>
> On 14/02/2021 12:17, Vincent van      Duijnhoven via Tagging wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks for the summary.
>>
>> If I understand you correctly, you don't want to use        landuse but rather extend the use of natural=scrub? You then        want to add an additional tag to natural=scrub like managed or        denotation. 
>>
>> I understand your opinion about landuse and I think I        agree. The question is then, introduce a new natural value or        re-built natural=scrub. One thing though, especially some native        English speakers stated is that when they think of scrub, they        think of the wild version and not the decorative we are talking        about. With "scrubland" in the description of the wiki page, I        would also think the same. I also understand though that        natual=shrub would potentially conflict with natural=scrub
>>
>> If natural=scrub is adjusted, the wiki page of        natural=scrub would then need to be adjusted to match both scrub        on (un)cultivated land and decorative as illustrated in the        images in my proposal. The definition then needs to be broadened        to give a range of possible definitions (e.g. scrubland, scrub,        for decorative purposes etc).
>>
>> Additionally, I would personally          only use denotation and not managed. Currently, you also don't          add managed=yes to a natural=tree. I think that if we extend          the values of denotation, it can say more about the scrub than          managed=yes. Possible values:          denotation=urban|wild|decoration.
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Vincent
>>
>>
>> 13 feb. 2021 23:19 van >> bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com>> :
>>
>>>
>>> SUMMARY:
>>>
>>>
>>> Question 1: consensus on no support creating another top          level key:value. landuse:shrub / landuse:bush. Landcover and          landform surely not supported.
>>>
>>>
>>> Question 2: natural=scrub should be used, mapped as an area          on or within an area with a defined landuse. managed=* is          optional, denotation as with trees to further define it's          significance.. Actions: extend the related wiki pages with          description of what is cultivated and uncultivated LAND and          how to map and tag + what is to be used to map and tag          cultivated and/or managed VEGETATION (regardless if it is          located on cultivated or uncultivated land).
>>>
>>>
>>> Question 3: barrier=hedge should not be used in these cases.           It should be used when the vegetation is predominately linear          AND has either a primary purpose or use as barrier, or          boundary or border. Hedges covers both managed / maintained as          unmaintained / not managed. ("cultivated" has never been used          as a term with hedges as far as I can recall).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210214/c0659f33/attachment-0001.htm>