[OSM-talk] Do we care if its forest or wood? Natural world mapping ...

Gustav Foseid gustavf at gmail.com
Tue Jul 21 19:37:15 BST 2009


On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com
> wrote:

> of course it is studied. And it surely is usable in some way, but as
> far as I have seen (it's 163 pages) it doesn't deal at all with
> national parks and other protective areas (that's also logical, as
> this is not landcover but legal stuff).


A replacement for the tags landuse=forest and natural=wood should, in my
opinion, also deal only with landcover/eco systems and not protective areas.
A forest (wood, area with trees, whatever) should be tagged as such, no
matter if it is inside or outside a national park.

I would prefer a combination of natural=trees for smaller areas covered with
trees, typically within urban areas, and natural=forest for larger forests
or areas with forest like eco systems.

 - Gustav
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090721/74b06854/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list