[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shrubbery

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mo., 22. Feb. 2021 um 14:37 Uhr schrieb Vincent van Duijnhoven <
vvanduijnhoven at outlook.com>:

> According to wiki, natural=shrub already exists to map individual shrubs
> (just like natural=tree):
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=shrub . So, if at all
> shrubbery should be renamed, it should be renamed to natural=shrubs in my
> opinion.
>


while it would work well on a semantic level, I believe "shrub", "scrub"
and "shrubs" are very similar and might easily be confused.


>
> About the definition, I didn't knew a better way to define the tag. This
> definition by you seems also fine to me: "a group of shrubs or bushes,
> characterized by stems with mostly a woody appearance and branches
> appearing at or close to the ground. In some cases the stem(s) are not
> woody like f.i. in most cacti and some low growing bamboos.".
>>
>> I personally wouldn't add exact height definitions in the definition
>>
>

if it is not woody (specific low growing bamboo), it would be "grass", or
not? (I am not a botanic, as you may see from this sentence). I would not
add a height definition either, but I believe it would be crucial to
distinguish this  new tag from "natural=scrub", and to specify how exactly
it should be applied. Could I add it to a surface where both, grass and
shrubs are growing? Can I walk over it? Step through them between the
bushes, or would it be too dense and I should regard it as an obstacle
which I would avoid at all costs?
Is it a feature you would expect to be tagged in a garden or urban park, in
plains, in the jungle?
What about spines/thorns? What do we use for bramble?

Is scrub the same as thicket, coppice and covert?
brush?

Cheers
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210222/cb8e1460/attachment.htm>