[OSM-talk] Woods vs Forests
Daniel Koć
daniel at xn--ko-wla.pl
Fri Oct 27 09:21:38 UTC 2017
W dniu 27.10.2017 o 08:36, Warin pisze:
> The landuse key is clearly to tag the use of the land by humans.
It's also to indicate use of the water, hence it's not 100% clear and I
understand why some people don't like it.
> The natural key is unclear - it seams to be for both things made by
> nature and things made by man! To me this confused all and the key
> should be discouraged.
> It should be replaced by the keys landcover and landform, these have
> no implication of human or nature but simply describe the type of
> feature.
Let's look at natural=tree - it doesn't matter if the tree was seeded by
man or by natural means, the tree is natural object, which was not
created by man (even GMO is about _modyfying_, not creating). There can
be however man_made=tree - we have a popular artwork in Warsaw, which is
a palm made of plastic (tagging has changed, but it's a nice example):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greetings_from_Jerusalem_Avenues
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1795659661
Landcover is neutral (what one can see on the surface). I like it
because it's closest to the "ground truth", and is very useful when we
don't know more details. However we could promote "surface" tag as a
primary and it would also make sense for me (currently it's defined as
additional tag: "used to provide additional information about the
physical surface of roads/footpaths and some other features").
I have no idea what "landform" can be, so I don't have an opinion on that.
However "natural" key for trees (
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=trees maybe?) sounds
perfectly valid for me.
--
"My method is uncertain/ It's a mess but it's working" [F. Apple]
More information about the talk
mailing list