[OSM-talk] Woods vs Forests

Tomas Straupis tomasstraupis at gmail.com
Fri Oct 27 10:49:49 UTC 2017


2017-10-27 12:25 GMT+03:00 Dave F wrote:
> You appear to be differentiating based on size & location which, seeing
> OSM's output is visual & geospatial seems unnecessary.

  If we make no such distinction, then in order to be topographically
correct, we would have to "cut out" (create multipolygons) for each
small wood areas with 10 trees inside say residential area.

> *All* groups of trees are 'natural' so there should only be one primary tag.
> All "purposes" should be within sub-tags.

  Fine. Let's say in higher level there is only one "forest". Then my
topic moves one layer down and stays exactly the same otherwise.
  What I'm talking is about virtual hierarchy.
  OSM tagging comes AFTER that.

-- 
Tomas



More information about the talk mailing list