Re: [Tagging] RFC: intelligence facility

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 11. Apr 2018, at 07:34, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Are they under the military or under the civilian government?
> 
> How does OSM separate out other government/military departments?



some are military, some are governmental, and some seem to be sth on their own 
;-)

office is ok for offices, but I’d tag this to the office, not the whole 
facility. By using a different key we can distinguish and combine as needed.
For military services you can add military=* as well.

cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[John Willis]

Actual flower Farms are landuse=farmland crop=flowers. Yea, they may have a 
viewpoint and a gift shop. But those large commercial farms are not what I'm 
talking about. 

These are about tagging the actual beds of decorative flowers with 
landuse=flowerbed (which I think is totally a landuse - it is land dedicated to 
flowers for display or decoration), and tagging gardens that are "flower 
spectacles" - places that grow flowers primarily as a spectacle (and often 
charge admission) using a garden:type=foobar is the two tags I am asking for 
feedback on. Landuse=grass is crappy - is it for sports? picnicing? Roadside 
shoulder? Landscaping? 

Luckily flowers in a non-farm sense serve a single purpose - to be looked at. 
They are colorful decorations. You don't sleep on them. You don't play sports 
on them. People grow flowers in dedicated land merely to be enjoyed. 



Several places around the world grow tulips and build a Dutch windmill to 
emulate a working landuse=farmland - but just as Space Mountain is neither a 
spaceship nor an actual mountain, these are tourist attractions made to emulate 
the look of a farm for people looking to take pictures. These fall into the 
category of "flower attractions" and I want to tag these as such. 

When I lived in San diego, the only thing I had ever seen like this is the 
Carlsbad flower fields. There are formal botanical gardens and rose gardens - 
but a town or large commercial park just doesn't purposefully grow very large 
fields of flowers in a large field and put out a viewing platform like they do 
in Japan *and* get hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of people a week 
that come to just merely view the spectacle  that they purposefully made, year 
after year in the same spot and static configuration. 

Maybe it is common in the rest of the world, but these flower spectacles (and 
their dedicated area just for flowers) seems something that needs precise 
tagging. 

Javbw

> On Apr 10, 2018, at 2:19 PM, Clifford Snow  wrote:
> 
> In John Wills original post he talked about tulip farms. T

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[John Willis]

> On Apr 10, 2018, at 11:09 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> they are. A flowerbed is about something human made. What you have been 
> posting is a forest

+1 

There are many natural spectacles (the fall colors on the mountains, certian 
flowers that grow on wild hills, etc) that is a form of attraction, but is 
neither a subset of garden nor a flowerbed. 

Just like a fountain in a park and a waterfall in the wilderness. 

Just to muddy the waters, several places I take pictures of flowers "in the 
wilderness" are transplanted and cultivated by the locals. Some of the flowers 
are native to other regions, and transplanted to similar climates to recreate 
the natural spectacle, and to diversify the locations (in case a volcano 
explodes and kills all the others in one spot). They care for the plants and 
increase their density to keep the (moneymaking) attraction. But these are 
pretty rare compared the flower spectacles I am talking about. 

There was an eruption on Mt Kusatsu-Shirane a few months ago; it was 400m from 
some mountain flowers they painstakingly transplanted a couple decades prior. I 
hope they all lived. 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/11094084766/

Javbw. 



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-04-11 11:30 GMT+02:00 John Willis :

> Actual flower Farms are landuse=farmland crop=flowers. Yea, they may have
> a viewpoint and a gift shop. But those large commercial farms are not what
> I'm talking about.
>
> These are about tagging the actual beds of decorative flowers with
> landuse=flowerbed (which I think is totally a landuse - it is land
> dedicated to flowers for display or decoration)



I understand the land is dedicated to displaying flowers, but landuses are
usually broader categories.
And I wouldn't look at these in a feature agnostic way. An area with
decorative flowers organized and presented in flowerbeds, with visitors and
maybe a fee, will be something, like a flower show, with a name, maybe a
website etc. that distinguishes them from the private flowerbeds in a
residential area. IMHO you should aim at representing this feature. It
doesn't mean you can't map the single flowerbed inside, but first I'd look
for a way to represent the whole thing.




> , and tagging gardens that are "flower spectacles" - places that grow
> flowers primarily as a spectacle (and often charge admission) using a
> garden:type=foobar is the two tags I am asking for feedback on.
> Landuse=grass is crappy - is it for sports? picnicing? Roadside shoulder?
> Landscaping?
>


leisure=garden
with subtags if you like

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Railways along streets

[François Lacombe]

I would definetly map it with 2 distinct ways.
They can both share the same nodes, or map the road as two "oneway"
highways with the railway between both directions

All the best

François

*François Lacombe*

fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
www.infos-reseaux.com
@InfosReseaux 

2018-04-11 0:48 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson :

>
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 17:30 Albert Pundt  wrote:
>
>> What's the best way to map a railway along a street, and how are the
>> street intersections to be mapped? For example, this street
>>  in Lewistown, PA has a freight line
>> running along the middle. Should it be mapped as two overlapping ways, as
>> that example is currently, or should they be drawn as one way with all the
>> highway and railway tags on it?
>>
>
> The highway centerline at the mean location of the middle of the road, per
> usual, and the tracks mapped between the rails per usual.
>
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Railways along streets

[André Pirard]

On 2018-04-11 13:47, François Lacombe wrote:
> I would definetly map it with 2 distinct ways.
> They can both share the same nodes, or map the road as two "oneway"
> highways with the railway between both directions
Good idea sharing nodes, that's doable but a bit tricky with JOSM. I
wonder about other editors.
I would however make a short test to see what Osmose say about it
(rightly or not).
There's a floating rule that ways cannot overlap unless making areas
share the same limits (e.g. buildings).
I would raise the layer=* of the railway. I seem to think overlapping is
allowed then.
I swear I don't map for the render but that doesn't stop me wondering
what it will be.

Cheers

André.


> All the best
>
> François
>
> *François Lacombe*
>
> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
> www.infos-reseaux.com 
> @InfosReseaux 
>
> 2018-04-11 0:48 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson  >:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 17:30 Albert Pundt  > wrote:
>
> What's the best way to map a railway along a street, and how
> are the street intersections to be mapped? For example, this
> street  in Lewistown, PA has
> a freight line running along the middle. Should it be mapped
> as two overlapping ways, as that example is currently, or
> should they be drawn as one way with all the highway and
> railway tags on it?
>
>
> The highway centerline at the mean location of the middle of the
> road, per usual, and the tracks mapped between the rails per usual.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Railways along streets

[Nick Bolten]

One downside of mapping the railway on a separate layer is that
intersecting streets would be neglected, such as S Main St at the next
intersection. S Main St actually crosses the rail and some part of that
intersection should probably be tagged with info about the rail crossing
(i.e. they should share a node), but this would not be caught by QA /
editors with validation because different-layer ways are allowed to
intersect without sharing a node.

There's also potential for impacts on other features like footways that
intersect or ways that actually are on a different layer that now need to
be bumped up/down to avoid intersecting the rail.

François' suggestion seems like the most descriptive option in lieu of a
lane-like standard for composite ways.

On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:08 PM André Pirard 
wrote:

> On 2018-04-11 13:47, François Lacombe wrote:
>
> I would definetly map it with 2 distinct ways.
> They can both share the same nodes, or map the road as two "oneway"
> highways with the railway between both directions
>
> Good idea sharing nodes, that's doable but a bit tricky with JOSM. I
> wonder about other editors.
> I would however make a short test to see what Osmose say about it (rightly
> or not).
> There's a floating rule that ways cannot overlap unless making areas share
> the same limits (e.g. buildings).
> I would raise the layer=* of the railway. I seem to think overlapping is
> allowed then.
> I swear I don't map for the render but that doesn't stop me wondering what
> it will be.
>
> Cheers
>
> André.
>
> All the best
>
> François
>
> *François Lacombe*
>
> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
> www.infos-reseaux.com
> @InfosReseaux 
>
> 2018-04-11 0:48 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson :
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 17:30 Albert Pundt  wrote:
>>
>>> What's the best way to map a railway along a street, and how are the
>>> street intersections to be mapped? For example, this street
>>>  in Lewistown, PA has a freight line
>>> running along the middle. Should it be mapped as two overlapping ways, as
>>> that example is currently, or should they be drawn as one way with all the
>>> highway and railway tags on it?
>>>
>>
>> The highway centerline at the mean location of the middle of the road,
>> per usual, and the tracks mapped between the rails per usual.
>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing 
> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Railways along streets

[Adam Snape]

On 11 April 2018 at 12:47, François Lacombe 
wrote:

> I would definetly map it with 2 distinct ways.
> They can both share the same nodes, or map the road as two "oneway"
> highways with the railway between both directions
>

+1 to mapping tehm as separate ways.
If traffic can physically cross from one side of the railway to the other
(eg. to do a u-turn) the road shouldn't be mapped as two oneway highways
because it affects routing.

Kind regards,

Adam
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Railways along streets

[Erkin Alp Güney]

Do as done on trams. highway=* with railway=rail.
>
>
>> All the best
>>
>> François
>>
>> *François Lacombe*
>>
>> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
>> www.infos-reseaux.com 
>> @InfosReseaux 
>>
>> 2018-04-11 0:48 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson > >:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 17:30 Albert Pundt > > wrote:
>>
>> What's the best way to map a railway along a street, and how
>> are the street intersections to be mapped? For example, this
>> street  in Lewistown, PA
>> has a freight line running along the middle. Should it be
>> mapped as two overlapping ways, as that example is currently,
>> or should they be drawn as one way with all the highway and
>> railway tags on it?
>>
>>
>> The highway centerline at the mean location of the middle of the
>> road, per usual, and the tracks mapped between the rails per usual.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[John Willis]

Javbw

> On Apr 11, 2018, at 7:37 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> An area with decorative flowers organized and presented in flowerbeds, with 
> visitors and maybe a fee, will be something, like a flower show, with a name, 
> maybe a website etc.

That is the overall Garden.  Garden:type=flower_field. Or flower_Spectacle. 
Whatever people suggest.  Tag the fees, name, website, etc on the enclosing 
garden tag (along with tourism=attraction). 

I micromap tourist destinations. I tag the walking paths and walls. Hedges and 
driveways. Individual trees. Fences, gates, parking lot refs and individual 
vending machines. Many of the places I personally visit are flower parks. I 
have visited  9 flower parks in the last few years. I map places I visit 
and revisit. Most are large outdoor gardens that fit into existing garden tags. 
A few of them are either a stand-alone flower fields or a garden/park/ with a 
named feature that is a dedicated large flower field (like that hill of blue 
nemophila). But all of them have beds of flowers with areas easily mappable 
from imagery. 


I need another tag that says "this area here visible in imagery is decorative 
flowers". This exact 5m2 Or 100m2. If that is landuse=flower_bed or 
man_made=flowerbed or whatever, it's okay with me, I would like to "approve" it 
so we can get it documented, along with the garden:type=value. 

Javbw
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Warin]

On 11/04/18 19:30, John Willis wrote:

Actual flower Farms are landuse=farmland crop=flowers. Yea, they may have a 
viewpoint and a gift shop. But those large commercial farms are not what I'm 
talking about.

These are about tagging the actual beds of decorative flowers with 
landuse=flowerbed (which I think is totally a landuse - it is land dedicated to 
flowers for display or decoration),


-1 ... it is not a 'landuse'.
The same can be done by other things than flower beds ... lilies on a pond, 
topiary for example.
It is not defined by 'flowerbed!

It is a land cover ...


and tagging gardens that are "flower spectacles" - places that grow flowers 
primarily as a spectacle (and often charge admission) using a garden:type=foobar is the 
two tags I am asking for feedback on. Landuse=grass is crappy - is it for sports? 
picnicing? Roadside shoulder? Landscaping?


A flower bed can be for obtaining cut flowers in a residential garden. The land 
use is still residential, not flowerbed.

A flowerbed can be in the middle of a roundabout, the landuse is still highway.

The land cover in both the above is a flowerbed.




Luckily flowers in a non-farm sense serve a single purpose - to be looked at. 
They are colorful decorations. You don't sleep on them. You don't play sports 
on them. People grow flowers in dedicated land merely to be enjoyed.


Or to cut up and placed inside for decoration and smell.





Several places around the world grow tulips and build a Dutch windmill to emulate a 
working landuse=farmland - but just as Space Mountain is neither a spaceship nor an 
actual mountain, these are tourist attractions made to emulate the look of a farm for 
people looking to take pictures. These fall into the category of "flower 
attractions" and I want to tag these as such.


Tourist attractions. Land cover = flowerbed.



When I lived in San diego, the only thing I had ever seen like this is the 
Carlsbad flower fields. There are formal botanical gardens and rose gardens - 
but a town or large commercial park just doesn't purposefully grow very large 
fields of flowers in a large field and put out a viewing platform like they do 
in Japan *and* get hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of people a week 
that come to just merely view the spectacle  that they purposefully made, year 
after year in the same spot and static configuration.

Maybe it is common in the rest of the world, but these flower spectacles (and 
their dedicated area just for flowers) seems something that needs precise 
tagging.

Javbw


On Apr 10, 2018, at 2:19 PM, Clifford Snow  wrote:

In John Wills original post he talked about tulip farms. T

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 11. Apr 2018, at 23:23, John Willis  wrote:
> 
> I need another tag that says "this area here visible in imagery is decorative 
> flowers". This exact 5m2 Or 100m2. If that is landuse=flower_bed or 
> man_made=flowerbed or whatever,


I would choose man_made for this, not landuse. 

cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[John Willis]

Javbw

On Apr 12, 2018, at 7:04 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> You don't play sports on them. People grow flowers in dedicated land merely 
>> to be enjoyed.
> 
> Or to cut up and placed inside for decoration and smell.

You can't nest landuses? We nest every other type of area. 

I am not mapping individual blooms, nor does someone snipping a blossom and 
bringing it in their house affect the mapping of flowerbeds. I am mapping the 
use of this spot of land. To me, that is a landuse. If it is landcover or 
man_made or a new key like landscaping= or whatever, I don't care - but 
landuse=flower_bed is in defacto use and seems acceptable. 

No one digs up the entire area of land and destroys it if they are just 
snipping a blossom. The flowers are a decoration in the flowerbed. It is not a 
flower farm. I have an orange tree in my yard - I do not run an orchard. A 
flower park is not a farm either. The purpose of the land is still to grow 
ornamental flowers for enjoying their beauty there.  If they kill all the 
flowers and plant grass or build a shed, it is no longer a flowerbed. 



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Marc Gemis]

How do you tag a cafe (or any other amenity) that is run as part of an
outreach project ?
The cafe is available to everyone, but the employees are part of an
outreach project (e.g. people with disabilities).

Thanks in advance

m.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Marc Gemis]

If it is not landuse=flower_bed,what is the landuse tag then ? The
land is used for something, not ? So even when you tag it as landcover
(or man_made) = flower_bed, I would still expect to be able to add a
landuse tag as well.

m.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/04/18 19:30, John Willis wrote:
>>
>> Actual flower Farms are landuse=farmland crop=flowers. Yea, they may have
>> a viewpoint and a gift shop. But those large commercial farms are not what
>> I'm talking about.
>>
>> These are about tagging the actual beds of decorative flowers with
>> landuse=flowerbed (which I think is totally a landuse - it is land dedicated
>> to flowers for display or decoration),
>
>
> -1 ... it is not a 'landuse'.
> The same can be done by other things than flower beds ... lilies on a pond,
> topiary for example.
> It is not defined by 'flowerbed!
>
> It is a land cover ...
>
>> and tagging gardens that are "flower spectacles" - places that grow
>> flowers primarily as a spectacle (and often charge admission) using a
>> garden:type=foobar is the two tags I am asking for feedback on.
>> Landuse=grass is crappy - is it for sports? picnicing? Roadside shoulder?
>> Landscaping?
>
>
> A flower bed can be for obtaining cut flowers in a residential garden. The
> land use is still residential, not flowerbed.
>
> A flowerbed can be in the middle of a roundabout, the landuse is still
> highway.
>
> The land cover in both the above is a flowerbed.
>
>
>>
>> Luckily flowers in a non-farm sense serve a single purpose - to be looked
>> at. They are colorful decorations. You don't sleep on them. You don't play
>> sports on them. People grow flowers in dedicated land merely to be enjoyed.
>
>
> Or to cut up and placed inside for decoration and smell.
>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Several places around the world grow tulips and build a Dutch windmill to
>> emulate a working landuse=farmland - but just as Space Mountain is neither a
>> spaceship nor an actual mountain, these are tourist attractions made to
>> emulate the look of a farm for people looking to take pictures. These fall
>> into the category of "flower attractions" and I want to tag these as such.
>
>
> Tourist attractions. Land cover = flowerbed.
>
>>
>> When I lived in San diego, the only thing I had ever seen like this is the
>> Carlsbad flower fields. There are formal botanical gardens and rose gardens
>> - but a town or large commercial park just doesn't purposefully grow very
>> large fields of flowers in a large field and put out a viewing platform like
>> they do in Japan *and* get hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of
>> people a week that come to just merely view the spectacle  that they
>> purposefully made, year after year in the same spot and static
>> configuration.
>>
>> Maybe it is common in the rest of the world, but these flower spectacles
>> (and their dedicated area just for flowers) seems something that needs
>> precise tagging.
>>
>> Javbw
>>
>>> On Apr 10, 2018, at 2:19 PM, Clifford Snow 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> In John Wills original post he talked about tulip farms. T
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Warin]

On 12/04/18 15:35, Marc Gemis wrote:

If it is not landuse=flower_bed,what is the landuse tag then ? The
land is used for something, not ? So even when you tag it as landcover
(or man_made) = flower_bed, I would still expect to be able to add a
landuse tag as well.


Yes... for things like a lilly pond, topiary etc
If not already used for something else - like highway, residential etc.

?landuse=decorative? passive_recreation?

I think the tag should not be a specific physical object but what it is used 
for - the human attribute.
Does that make sense?


On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 11/04/18 19:30, John Willis wrote:

Actual flower Farms are landuse=farmland crop=flowers. Yea, they may have
a viewpoint and a gift shop. But those large commercial farms are not what
I'm talking about.

These are about tagging the actual beds of decorative flowers with
landuse=flowerbed (which I think is totally a landuse - it is land dedicated
to flowers for display or decoration),


-1 ... it is not a 'landuse'.
The same can be done by other things than flower beds ... lilies on a pond,
topiary for example.
It is not defined by 'flowerbed!

It is a land cover ...


and tagging gardens that are "flower spectacles" - places that grow
flowers primarily as a spectacle (and often charge admission) using a
garden:type=foobar is the two tags I am asking for feedback on.
Landuse=grass is crappy - is it for sports? picnicing? Roadside shoulder?
Landscaping?


A flower bed can be for obtaining cut flowers in a residential garden. The
land use is still residential, not flowerbed.

A flowerbed can be in the middle of a roundabout, the landuse is still
highway.

The land cover in both the above is a flowerbed.



Luckily flowers in a non-farm sense serve a single purpose - to be looked
at. They are colorful decorations. You don't sleep on them. You don't play
sports on them. People grow flowers in dedicated land merely to be enjoyed.


Or to cut up and placed inside for decoration and smell.




Several places around the world grow tulips and build a Dutch windmill to
emulate a working landuse=farmland - but just as Space Mountain is neither a
spaceship nor an actual mountain, these are tourist attractions made to
emulate the look of a farm for people looking to take pictures. These fall
into the category of "flower attractions" and I want to tag these as such.


Tourist attractions. Land cover = flowerbed.


When I lived in San diego, the only thing I had ever seen like this is the
Carlsbad flower fields. There are formal botanical gardens and rose gardens
- but a town or large commercial park just doesn't purposefully grow very
large fields of flowers in a large field and put out a viewing platform like
they do in Japan *and* get hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of
people a week that come to just merely view the spectacle  that they
purposefully made, year after year in the same spot and static
configuration.

Maybe it is common in the rest of the world, but these flower spectacles
(and their dedicated area just for flowers) seems something that needs
precise tagging.

Javbw


On Apr 10, 2018, at 2:19 PM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

In John Wills original post he talked about tulip farms. T

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging