> It would be usefull to know that a scrub area is so dense that it cannot be walked through, yet another scrub area is so sparse that a fire cannot propagate without wind.
I agree! Those definitions are a pretty good start. Probably it should relate to the density of the “canopy” of the main type of vegetation. So a high-density woodland or scrubland or heath would have the branches each tree or shrub touching its neighbors, while sparse or low density would be widely spaced, with the “canopy” of the main vegetation type covering about 50% of the area only, with plenty of room in between. This could be especially help info in desert and semi-arid climates. > Even if those can be tagged, how would they be rendered? If a renderer uses a pattern to show the type of tree or shrub, the icons could be closer together or farther apart depending on the density, at least at high zoom levels. Or different fill colors could be used. On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 7:52 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 24/01/19 09:12, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:54 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The main OSM map renders grass, trees as solid colours, and residential > areas too .. that is not good to me. > > Another example of the landuse/landcover confusion. We could make an > > argument that we need a landcover value for 'densely developed'. The > > US National Land Cover Dataset has several values for 'developed > > land', just as it has several values for 'forested' (based on leaf > > cycle) and several for 'farmland' (pasture, cropland, orchard, > > vineyard, etc.) > > > > It's possible, though rare, to have a residential land USE with a > > different land COVER - consider a small cluster of private houses on a > > densely wooded parcel. I've been somewhat at a loss how to map the > > combination, but it's just another example of the same problem: one is > > physical and topographical, one is human and social. > > > Off the subject but: > > The density of things (houses, people, plants) is not something OSM does > well or at all. > > It would be usefull to know that a scrub area is so dense that it cannot > be walked through, > yet another scrub area is so sparse that a fire cannot propagate without > wind. > Even if those can be tagged, how would they be rendered? > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
