On 07-Dec-17 03:28 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
On 05.12.2017 20:40, Marc Zoutendijk wrote:> Martin, did you see the
pictures I have added to the wiki? [1]
Nice pictures, but they belong onto the discussion page, as it is
_not_ an 'alternative' use, it is a use _against_ the original
definition.
For me landcover=urban_green (maybe: urban_vegetation) is a perfect
fit for what we need.
Yes I'd be much in favour for a generic landcover value, it could eben
be landcover=green which is short and concise, and avoids thinking
about villages and urbanity.
The colour 'green' says little about what the cover of the ground is. It
could be green coloured concrete!!!
If 'green' means plants then say plants (I'd prefer 'vegetation' but
that might be just me).
From what I understood, we are trying to avoid “village_green”
because it is only relevant to UK legal situations, making it
unsuitable for use outside of the UK.
It is suitable, as long as the use is comparable to what a legal
village green is comparable to the UK situation.
Legal? The land cover should say nothing about the legal situation!!!
Land cover ... What does it mean?
I don't think it has anything to do with the use of the land, the
legalities of it, the shape of it, just the cover of it.
Please stop trying to fit square pegs into round holes.
If you want to specify a land use then use landuse, if you want to
specify land cover use landcover.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
