[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse bush

Sun Feb 14 18:25:28 UTC 2021

Would that be a wise move ? If we introduce a new scrub key, to be
consistent, we will have to do the same for other vegetation types,
grass= wild / mowed, heath = wild /clipped. I proposed managed (not that
much used) and denotation (widely used) since they are used for similar
attributions, more specifically for trees.  Same as we can use other
commonly used attribution tags like the leaftype for vegetation, even
they could be used on hedge.
Sorry for al the work you have done Vincent, but be sure it is much
appreciated, you started discussion and for sure a significant
improvement on the wiki and tagging consistency.

Greetings, Bert Araali

On 14/02/2021 20:15, Vincent van Duijnhoven via Tagging wrote:
> 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
>>     <mailto: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).
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210214/ea70afb2/attachment-0001.htm>