[OSM-talk] Woods vs Forests

[James]

landuse= man made and maintained
natrual= it made itself(which is 99.9% of the time the case)

On Oct 27, 2017 5:27 AM, "Dave F" <davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com> wrote:

> You appear to be differentiating based on size & location which, seeing
> OSM's output is visual & geospatial seems unnecessary.
>
> *All* groups of trees are 'natural' so there should only be one primary
> tag. All "purposes" should be within sub-tags.
>
> DaveF
>
> On 27/10/2017 08:52, Tomas Straupis wrote:
>
>> Some info on how/why forest/wood tagging is used in Lithuania. I will
>> not give specific tags (forest vs wood, landuse vs natural etc),
>> because in my opinion that is a secondary issue. Let's say we have
>> tags F1 and F2.
>>
>> F1 is for general forests. Those are the ones depicted on small scale
>> maps (full country/region).
>>
>> F2 is for small wooded areas INSIDE other polygons, usually inside
>> residential, commercial, industrial zones.
>>
>> This approach ignores utility as such (managed, non managed, natural,
>> left for full nature cycles as mention in Oleksiy's post). This
>> information could be added as a sub-tag if needed for some thematic
>> maps or specific statistical calculations.
>>
>> What I'm saying is that maybe we should:
>> 1. first decide the PURPOSES of having "tree cluster" polygons tagged
>> separately.
>> 2. Then PRIORITISE the purposes (based on ACTUAL usage ignoring all
>> "it could theoretically be used to/for...")
>> 3. and then decide which info goes to primary tag, which goes to
>> secondary tag(s).
>> 4. And only THEN decide on actual tags (keys, values).
>> Doing it the other way round will take us back to this forest
>> discussion as it has been here for the last ten years like discussing
>> what the words "forest", "wood", "natural", "landuse", "landcover"
>> etc. actually mean.
>>
>>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20171027/e9b99577/attachment.html>