Edit ... what I meant to say ... and some additions...
On 27/12/2015 3:13 PM, Warin wrote:
On 27/12/2015 12:19 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote:
I think you are overreaching a bit on this. For one thing, not all
forests are for wood production - rubber tree plantations for example
are for extracting sap from trees.
Had not thought of that.
Some trees produce nuts, others fruit .. they would be
landuse=orchard. With landcover=trees.
{add ..} and some trees are used to produce oil e.g. sandalwood, tea
tree and eucalyptus oils. {/add}
Natural=wood seems perfectly correct to me for stands of trees in a
more or less "natural" state whereas landcover=trees implies, at
least to me, an area with planted trees that are not being used for
sap, or lumber, etc., but more for their decorative or shading effect.
Err.. I think your confusing landUSE with landCOVER.
To me landcover=trees simply means there are trees there. It does not
say what they are used for.
So suitable tags for an area used for lumber would be
landuse=forestry
landcover=trees
An area of trees for decoration, recreation
landcover=trees
landuse=recreation ?
How are rubber trees tagged now? I would tag
landcover=trees
landuse=orchard ... ? Don't know. Possibly landuse=forestry with the
definition of
{edit} forestry set to 'an area for the production of products from
trees (e.g. wood), excluding production of fruit/nuts (see orchard)'?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dorchard
There will need to be examples of the products.
And it should also document the ancillary things e.g. sawmills, drying
and storage sheds for possible inclusion.
{/edit}
What's your motivation do do this?
area
Attempt to make clear what tags to use for a 'forest' ...
{edit}
Document landuse=forestry such that it cannot be used for anything other
than forestry. (I hope! :-) )
Long term remove the present use of landuse=forest.
I have come across the problems while adding some National Parks, State
Forests and Conservation Areas that all had the tag landuse=forest on them.
I have changed that, but would like to see a reduction in the
possibility of future inappropriate tagging. {/edit}
For example
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:landuse%3Dforest#Forest_vs_Wood
suggest the density of the plants is the distinguishing thing between
natural=wood and landuse=forest.
The implication of landuse=foresty is fairly clear?
And I hope be translated without too much blurring of the intention?
Dave
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 7:49 AM, ajt1...@gmail.com <ajt1...@gmail.com
<mailto:ajt1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 27/12/2015 00:43, Warin wrote:
Hi,
The present multiple applications landuse=forest has me
thinking that a new tag of
landuse=forestry
maybe best to focus this new tag onto a specific forest use -
that of wood production.
For info, I have used that (once!):
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370079612
Rendering
The rendering of landuse=forestry should incorporate a brown
axe onto the original forest rendering to show that it is for
wood production.
I've not tried rendering it though.
Cheers,
Andy
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
