[Talk-GB] Mass edits of landuse /natural tags

[sk53.osm]

Why do you assume that landuse=grass is more correct than natural=grass.
This is precisely the problem I have with your edits. If I use natural=*
for something someone comes and changes it to landuse=* which is not what I
meant.

I ONLY use landuse=grass for amenity grassland (mainly in cities) which
would otherwise not be mapped. I would never use landuse=grass for
grassland in a farm or a nature reserve, or on a sports pitch (we have a
perfectly good surface=* for that). Unfortunately many people have used
landuse=grass indiscriminately (for instance for farmland in Holland
http://osm.org/go/0E6w0ZK-- and here in
Lancashire<http://osm.org/go/evhgKyE>(the area around Garstang shows
wholly inappropriate use of landuse=meadow
too). It seems that people prefer the green colour rendering for these over
the brown for farmland. I am unaware that landuse=farmland only refers to
arable.

I don't know if you have heard of places like the Steppes & the Pampas, the
American Plains,
or the Serengeti, but there do exist large areas of the world covered by
grasses which are natural!

You are not the only remote mapper to do this kind of change, xybot zapped
one of my natural=grass tags.

Obviously I will now have to make my intentions absolutely explict with
notes etc., which rather defeats the point of tags. Perhaps I should use
SK53:natural=wood and then they won't get trampled on.

The problem is that you are anxious for everything to be rendered in a
uniform manner, but you are not considering the many other use cases
particularly for landuse/landcover data. Continuous tidying up of tagging
in this area means that OSM is not currently a viable platform for serious
use for conservation

Jerry
.


On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:48 PM, John Baker <rovastar at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Just to be clear about what I am doing.
>
> I have been changing many what I consider typos. The majority have been
> simple changes I started by cleaning up the lanes tag as I was doing work
> getting lanes tagged correctly for the new CartoCSS and lanes=90 (where
> they was not) and lanes=two made no sense. So I fixed each of these
> worldwide looking at aerial imagery, (e.g. needed so leave a lanes=27 or
> something for a massive border entrance)
>
> Again inspired by my designing new style at doing CartoCSS styling I
> looked at other features that I has been doing, fountains, nightclubs,
> religions, ice rinks, etc
>
> Then fixing some the nature, landuse tags, landuse=maedow to meadow, etc
> within the same tagtype.
>
> Recently I wanted to tackle one of my biggest personal bugbears of
> natural=grass which is (now was) tagged incorrectly and should be
> landuse=grass. There where dozens/hundreds in my local area so I did the
> whole UK.
>
> In case where I moved tag type (natural to landuse) I looked at if they
> added anything to the corresponding tag.
>
> So if nature=grass already had landuse=park or something I didn't change
> it over.
>
> Also I looked at the ways that had a name or had notes and decided if they
> where due more investigation and if to edit them or not. To be honest most
> didn't and it was quick and easy to check in JOSM when I highlight them all.
>
> I tried to explain myself in the change set notes.
>
> I like to think I have been responsible when doing this and think it
> improves the database/map.
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Rovastar/edits?page=1
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:20:32 +0200
> > From: frederik at remote.org
> > To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Mass edits of landuse /natural tags
>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 04/24/2013 04:26 PM, John Baker wrote:
> > > AFAIC these were typo edits and getting the whole database more
> > > consistent. I have done dozens of changes to fix typos worldwide over
> > > the past few weeks and it would be crazy to have lengthy discussions on
> > > each one for multiple countries in multiple communication channels.
> >
> > If you don't have the time or the will to do it properly, then simply
> > leave it be.
> >
> > The rule is that as soon as you make an edit where you don't look at the
> > individual object you edit, it is a mechanical edit that has to be
> > discussed beforehand.
> >
> > The reason for this rule is that it is too easy to introduce mistakes -
> > what looks like a "typo" to one person could make sense to another.
> >
> > Assume that there's an object tagged landuse=forest *and* natural=meadow
> > *and* it carries a note tag that explains exactly what the mapper meant
> > by this. Someone simply looking for all natural=meadow and replacing
> > them with landuse=meadow would overwrite the landuse=forest and not even
> > see the note tag - he performs a mechanical edit that needs to be
> > discussed beforehand (in order to minimize undesirable side effects).
> >
> > On the other hand, if someone were to manually go through all objects
> > tagged natural=meadow, read potential note tags, look at the other tags
> > and/or aerial imagery, and *then* change them to landuse=meadow, that
> > would not be a mechanical edit.
> >
> > Bye
> > Frederik
> >
> > --
> > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20130425/9050a6ae/attachment.html>