I think in many cases place=location would be fine.
A forest or wood ("bos" (small) or "woud" (for bigger area) in Dutch)
is typically an area with primarily trees, but also grass areas,
pools, cuttings for paths and tracks, etc.So I was thinking that natural=wood (or landuse=forest) should only be rendered as an boundary. It can have a name (which should be rendered). For the describing the land-cover inside that area, one would use landcover or natural=water. Those would be used to "fill the map with colour". The landcovers areas can be multi-polygons, e.g. to cut out water areas from landcover=tree m. On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 9:08 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Nice question Marc. > > What is this named area? > Does it have some (taggable) function? > Is it 'just' a location? place=location? > > > On 23/01/19 18:55, Marc Gemis wrote: > > And where do you put the name of the forest/wood ? On the MP or on the > > outer way ? > > I would think on the outer way, as the scrub is part of the named > > area. But then I have an outer way with only a name tag. Is that > > correct ? > > > > m. > > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 8:51 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 23/01/19 18:25, Peter Elderson wrote: > >>> The rendering itself is a github issue of course, but it shoud be > >>> based on consistent tagging, which is a tagging list concern. > >>> > >>> I slipped up in the contradicting paragraphs... I meant, an area > >>> landCOVER=grass within a landUSE=forest. > >>> > >>> Main point is, let's recognise / support the growing use of the > >>> landcover key for the three main values: trees, grass and scrub. Then, > >>> bump the issues with the main renderers and editors. How to do that is > >>> not for this list, you are absolutely right about that. > >>> > >>> Only after that step, rediscuss the landuse key. > >> This developed from a simple question of how to map a tree area that has > >> holes in it of scrub etc. > >> A fairly simply question? > >> > >> The simple answer is to map the tree area as a relation with; > >> natural=wood (even if not 'natural' as OSM acepts that the key 'natural' > >> encompass things that many regard as not 'natural'), type multipolygon, > >> The surrounding closed way with the role outer. > >> Then place simple closed way/s for the hole/s tagged natural=scrub as > >> appropriate .. and then place them in the relation with the role 'inner'. > >> > >> ------------------------ > >> The problem came the simple use of the word forest! > >> > >> There is no need to wait for other steps to use the tag > >> landuse=forestry, it does not conflict with 'landcover' or 'natural' > >> tagging. > >> Many keys and values are developed in parallel. > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> 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 _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
