On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 07:46, Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com> wrote: > If we ever decide on an appropriate tagging scheme (landuse=logging or > landuse=forestry > + forestry=logging or whatever) and it gets rendered in some way that is > distinct from > natural= wood (say an axe icon at the centre) then it will be useful for > consumers. Instead > of "There should/should not be trees there, we must be lost" it's "Ah, > that land is for logging > so there may or may not be trees there, so we may not be lost." >
Was mapping yesterday, put in an area, then when I started searching for the description, iD brought up one of it's totally inappropriate suggestions of clearcut: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aman_made%3Dclearcut, together with a beautiful icon of a chainsaw! :-) A reword to say that this is an area dedicted to forestry / logging & may or may not be covered by trees at any time, may cover it? > From that perspective, maple trees for syrup are a different problem. > Possibly still nice > to be able to map in some way, > Would / could they be covered under =orchard: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dorchard I'll openly admit that I know nothing about how maple trees are grown - are they in a clump / plantation or spread out s individual trees through the woods? Thanks Graeme
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
