Netherlands have very extensive use of tree rows. Lets take the roads. Roads in our polders are almost always lined with tree rows, exept for the many crossings, roundabouts, tunnels, bridges etcetera. These roads stretch many kilometers. The lining is often not singular, but lines each direction separately. Most of the time there are separate bicycle lanes, often lined with tree rows. For water drainage there are drainage ditches on both sifes, again often lined with tree rows.
A motorway will often have double or triple tree rows on both sides and in the middle. On both sides of the motorway there usually is a parallel road, again lined with trees. Areas are often lined with trees. Even wood areas are often lined with tree rows. Water areas and waterways have tree rows most of the time. In cities, you will find rows of trees almost everywhere, not just lining roads. You can't map the individual trees. It's just too much and it changes faster than you can enter them. So most of the time, they are not mapped at all, for lack of properly rendering tree_row tag. The current fat green band rendering on Carto is worse than no rendering at all. Double and triple tree_rows are now often mapped as pieces of forest, and because of the regularity of appearance, orchards. For long single lane roads with single tree rows on each side, no bicycle and pedestrian ways on the sides and not too many interruptions, a tree-lined tag could be used. Most of the time, you would have to cut the road into many short pieces just to tag the tree lining variations correct. I'm not in favor of that. IMO the way to go is: - Better rendering of tree_row on OSM Carto (not our concern, but...) - Then, and only then, decent tagging of tree rows is an option. Tagging for the renderer? Well. Rendering is about the only use case for tagging tree rows, so how could it be anything else? Vr gr Peter Elderson Op di 12 feb. 2019 om 06:01 schreef Mark Wagner <mark+...@carnildo.com>: > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:55:50 +0200 > Tomas Straupis <tomasstrau...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Two things to add: > > 1. At least in Lithuania cartographic (topographic) "tree row" is > > defined as "a row of trees groing alongside a road or railway". That > > is random trees somewhere in a field do not become a "tree row" even > > if they are in a row. > > 2. If (1) is true in other countries, maybe "tree_row" should be an > > attribute of a road/railroad? Say > > highway=residential+tree_row=left|right|both. This way it would be > > much more convenient to create cartographically correct maps in 25k > > 50k scales without resorting to complex generalisation operations like > > displacement? > > > > Tree rows in the United States are usually planted as windbreaks. As > such, they're usually either perpendicular to the prevailing winds, or > run along the edge of someone's property line. Occasionally they're > planted for shade purposes, in which case they run east-west. Tree > rows planted parallel to a road are uncommon. > > "tree_row" as an attribute of a road might make sense, in the > same way as "sidewalk" tags do. As a replacement for > "natural=tree_row", it excludes a lot of the existing uses. > > -- > Mark > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
