Le mar. 14 aout 2012 à 20:18 +, Johan Jönsson a ecrit :
> If we replace "herbaceous" with "grass" you don´t have to know much about
> biology.
> FAO's idea is also to avoid biological and geological terms.
>
> The FAO-system relies on that a couple of different data is added, all of
> them
2012/8/15 Guillaume Allegre :
> Could you please give a link to the FAO schema you are
> referring to?
http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/y7220e/y7220e00.htm#Contents
basically they use a 2 phase classification system, where the first
phase is very simple and leads to 8 generic types of landcover. Th
I thought we used natural=* for this kind of thing.
For the different broad classes of vegetation discussed so far in this
thread, there's natural=grass/scrub/wood. Of course there's
natural=water. Other landcover types are uncommon in central Ohio so I'm
not familiar with their tagging, but I t
2012/8/15 David ``Smith'' :
> I thought we used natural=* for this kind of thing.
"natural" is not defined in a clear way IMHO, it is a mixture of
different kind of features, but most of them could be called
"geographical features" and if this was expressed clearly it would
introduce some logics
Hi,I followed the discussion about tagging a railway track or more. From a
geografersvieuw its simple, the closer youll go the more youll see. The program
hides all the extra info fi a 16 lanes highway or several railtracks aside. At
first I want to see a track or road. After closing in Im inte
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2012/8/15 David ``Smith'' :
> > I thought we used natural=* for this kind of thing.
>
>
> "natural" is not defined in a clear way IMHO, it is a mixture of
> different kind of features, but most of them could be called
> "geographical features" an
St Niklaas writes:
>
>
IMHO is a grass covered area, temporarily, scrubbs and trees are covering it
without care in an short period of time, whos tagging it again ? Why not
nature as tag in nature reserve area 's. Just to avoid the immage Ive seen,
with a large forest area and a view trees be
Hi
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/12742505
I created a multi-polygon (1754193) with an outer, & a couple of inners
to represent a riverbank with an island (there are other members, but
not relevant to this enquiry).
To the West of this is a closed way to represent the continua
On 15 August 2012 21:15, David ``Smith'' wrote:
> So why is a new tag or hierarchy needed? Are we just trying to standardize
> or formalize a presently-haphazard array of tags or values?
>
The problem at the moment is that we have two types of tags (landcover and
landuse) scattered throughout a
The easiest way to find out is to ask him ;)
Looking at his other recent edits, it looks like he is systematically going
through and fixing the issues in OSM Inspectors Multipolygon view:
http://goo.gl/aWpXQ - It still shows the error as i write this, but the
view might have been updated with his
10 matches
Mail list logo
