[OSM-talk] Woods vs Forests

[Dave F]

On 28/10/2017 22:02, Warin wrote:
>
>> Maybe 'purposes' was a bit confusing, I see landuse=residential as a 
>> primary tag. Sub-tags are 'descriptive', 'adjective'. The 'cuisine' 
>> of a restaurant, or 'managed' for woods. for example.
>
> I see landuse as the primary tag, the values used with it are 
> descriptive.
> There are secondary or sub tags such as 'name' that add details.

I agree 'landuse' /is/ primary' but the 'forest' value is being 
*misused* to describe various attributes of a group of trees: How 
they're managed, their size & density.

>
>>
>> The 'landuse' tag when combined with forest is a misuse of a primary 
>> tag as it's being used as an adjective.
>
> The landuse=forest will not always have trees on it. From time to time 
> they may be harvested and result in no trees.

That has nothing to do with my point.

>
>>
>> In this case, whether it's managed or not. Actually, it's use is even 
>> more confusing with people using it to describe the size of the area 
>> & density of trees, which, again, should be described with sub-tags.
>
> The density of trees in a forestry area may change over time, Usually 
> these areas are, when first planted, fairly dense in the number of 
> plants then they are thinned as the trees grow to select the better 
> trees to reach maturity.

Again, irrelevant to the clear stated problem.

DaveF


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus