2010/10/7 Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de>: >> I'd forgotten about that--good point. Although surface as currently >> used seems to be mainly in the context of roads. > > There's nothing to limit it to roads - it "describes the surface of a > feature". For example, the natural=beach wiki page recommends it for > beaches, too.
not a good example IMHO. I see it like this: surface is the real "surface" = a very thin layer, say infinitely thin, like the surface of a road. Landcover would be road (or highway) because it comprises also the other layers of the street (the metre below the surface). This might not yet make sense to you in the case of a highway, because landcover=road/highway is implicit in highway=xy. > There are some landcover types that don't fit into the surface key, > though - such as trees. So maybe a new key would be useful anyway, but > just for those things that aren't covered by surface? +1 cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
