Re: [Tagging] landuse for arboretum

2010-11-10 Thread John Smith
On 11 November 2010 12:18, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > I'd prefer keeping landuse values at a minimum, and using subtags > where necessary. For example landuse=residential something=apartments, > not landuse=apartments. Would landuse=conservation work for an > arboretum? +1 landuse=conservation co

Re: [Tagging] landuse for arboretum

2010-11-10 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > perhaps: > > landuse=botanical_garden > collection=arboretum|fruticetum|viticetum|pinetum|... I'd prefer keeping landuse values at a minimum, and using subtags where necessary. For example landuse=residential something=apartments, not landus

Re: [Tagging] landuse for arboretum

2010-11-10 Thread Richard Welty
On 11/10/10 7:28 PM, John Smith wrote: On 11 November 2010 08:27, Craig Wallace wrote: Wouldn't it be covered by leisure=garden? ie "Place where flowers and other plants are grown in a decorative and structured manner or for scientific purposes." Its just it specifically focuses on trees, as op

Re: [Tagging] landuse for arboretum

2010-11-10 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 7:28 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 11 November 2010 08:27, Craig Wallace wrote: >> Wouldn't it be covered by leisure=garden? ie "Place where flowers and other >> plants are grown in a decorative and structured manner or for scientific >> purposes." >> Its just it specifically

Re: [Tagging] landuse for arboretum

2010-11-10 Thread John Smith
On 11 November 2010 08:27, Craig Wallace wrote: > Wouldn't it be covered by leisure=garden? ie "Place where flowers and other > plants are grown in a decorative and structured manner or for scientific > purposes." > Its just it specifically focuses on trees, as opposed to flowers or other > plants

Re: [Tagging] Date formatting proposal

2010-11-10 Thread Laurence Penney
My proposal's based on ISO 8601, as is stated in the introduction. It adds syntax for other aspects of how people like to tag dates. Sticking to ISO 8601, we cannot be as *imprecise* as some OSMers (and historians and archaeologists) need. - L On 11 Nov 2010, at 01:00, Andrew Errington wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Date formatting proposal

2010-11-10 Thread Andrew Errington
On Thu, November 11, 2010 04:56, Laurence Penney wrote: > I'm posting here a link to a proposal for date formatting that I just > added to the start_date wiki page: > Comments welcome! Please follow up either here or on the Discussion page > on the wiki. IMHO the right answer is ISO8601: http://

Re: [Tagging] landuse for arboretum

2010-11-10 Thread Craig Wallace
On 10/11/2010 22:01, Richard Welty wrote: i'm currently doing the boundaries for the Pine Hollow Arboretum south of Albany NY. none of the current landuse/natural tags seem quite appropriate. landuse=forest and natural= wood are closest, but i'd hesitate to use either without a subtype tag indic

[Tagging] landuse for arboretum

2010-11-10 Thread Richard Welty
i'm currently doing the boundaries for the Pine Hollow Arboretum south of Albany NY. none of the current landuse/natural tags seem quite appropriate. landuse=forest and natural= wood are closest, but i'd hesitate to use either without a subtype tag indicating that it's specifically an arboretum

[Tagging] Date formatting proposal

2010-11-10 Thread Laurence Penney
I'm posting here a link to a proposal for date formatting that I just added to the start_date wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date The motivator was the discovery of many tag values of unfeasible heterogeneity in start_date. Taginfo reports 18313 usages (2814 distinct),