[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - boundary=forestry(_compartment) relations (Was "Feature Proposal - RFC - boundary=forest(_compartment) relations")

[Bert -Araali- Van Opstal]

In my opinion: keep on going with the discussion David, as you say in
case it gets approved it will have a huge impact but a possible solution
for a very long lasting issue. Be prepared however to invest a lot of
time and effort to adopt the proposal and give everyone enough time to
grasp the impact and complexity of this issue.  I think we all should be
happy, correct me if I am wrong, to have someone with a forestry
background as you are, to guide us in this process. Much appreciated.

Bert Araali

On 15/02/2021 17:01, David Marchal via Tagging wrote:
> Dear mappers and taggers,
>
> Additional concerns have been addressed, though not all. Given the
> impact of the proposal in case of approval, I assume it will never
> address all concerns, corner cases and possible uses, and that I
> should not expect unanimity about it. Still, I prefer to ask: do you
> folks consider the proposal ready for voting, or should I keep
> addressing concerns for now?
>
> Awaiting your answers,
>
> Regards.
>
>
> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email.
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> Le samedi, 13. février 2021 12:24, David Marchal
> <penegal.fr at protonmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> Dear mappers and taggers,
>>
>> The boundary=forestry(_compartment) proposal
>> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boundary%3Dforestry(_compartment)_relations)
>> has recently known significant changes: it now
>>
>>   * deprecates landuse=forest, as it replaces it and removes its
>>     confusion between forestry areas and wooded areas;
>>   * designates natural=wood for modelling wooded areas, managed or not;
>>   * deprecates landcover=trees, which is a duplicate of natural=wood;
>>   * includes more explainations and examples about the problems with
>>     current tagging and how the new tagging proposes to handle them.
>>
>> Thanks to all people who reviewed the proposal and made suggestions
>> or asked for clarifications! Do you folks have questions or comments
>> the proposal still does not address?
>>
>> Awaiting your answers,
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>>
>> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email.
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210215/701b1931/attachment.htm>