On 17/07/18 06:31, Alan Grant wrote:
But why do these discussions/controversies/ambiguities matter for golf courses? Are we talking about how to tag areas of tree cover that may exist between the fairways and greens?
And those areas can and should be tagged natural=wood -it renders, it does not imply a land use, and 'natural' is taken as both natural and unnatural.
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 22:21, Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com <mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote:On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 9:00 PM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com <mailto:kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 3:46 PM Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@tutanota.com <mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>> wrote: > landuse=forest in OSM is for tree-covered area, not for area used for logging-related purposes And we will keep having this discussion as long as there is no tag that denotes the latter that doesn't get repurposed for the former. As I recall (recollection may be flawed) the last go-round, the following seemed to be the case: 1) landuse=forest was intended for forestry, but the value (forest) was badly chosen. Growing trees to be logged is a use of the land. 2) landcover=trees wasn't currently rendered (my recollection may be particularly bad on that). 3) Because landuse=forest is badly named (should have been forestry) and therefore misleading, and because landcover=trees isn't rendered, landuse=forest was being used for two things. 4) Usual arguments about what constitutes a forest versus a wood and other noise as the whole thread degenerated. My take on it: tag trees for logging purposes as landuse=forestry (note spelling) and trees not for logging purposes as landcover=trees or natural=wood as preferred (we can have that argument another time). Then change the wiki to say that landuse=forest is deprecated because it gets misunderstood and misused, and point to the alternatives. Introducing two new tags that supersede an existing tag used ambiguously is the only hope of making this sort of thing work. Landuse=forestry is less likely to be misused because "forestry" means logging and because we'd have landcover=trees (which might even constitute something named "XYZ Forest". None of this stands a chance of happening unless OSM Carto agrees to implement landuse=forestry and landcover=trees. People don't use tags that don't render. Well, for small, specialized things they do, but for big areas of trees they won't. OSM Carto often won't implement new tags because they're not used much; people don't use new tags that don't render. Rinse, wash, repeat. What a shame we don't have a forum like a mailing list where we could all agree on sensible things to do and then they happen.-- Paul_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
