On 24/01/19 09:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 07:46, Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com
<mailto: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?
No.
Not all tree harvesting is done by clear felling. Some are selectively
logged.
Not all areas are 'man_made', some are 'natural' at least to my view point.
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?
There are also rubber trees, sandalwood, tea trees etc.
Most orchard trees are kept low for harvesting, that is what I expect to
find when I see one. I think maple and rubber trees are a bit higher.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
