While some have suggested that uses of the landuse=* key like landuse=grass, landuse=village_green and landuse=recreation_area lead to misuse of the landuse=* key, the landcover=* key appears to be even more problematic.
A newer user, Henke54, has continued to create new pages like Tag:landcover=dunes - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landcover%3Ddunes (instead of Tag:natural=dune), Tag:landcover=water (instead of natural=water), Tag:landcover=hedge (instead of barrier=hedge) and Tag:landcover=greenery (meant for all types of vegetation? Or shrubberies? Flower beds?) in the Tag: space. I think this shows that the concept of "landcover" is not clear even among users who promote this key over the established keys for vegetation and landform features (eg natural=*). What should we do with a page like Tag:landcover=dunes? I already tried adding a mention that natural=dune was more common and mentioned on the Talk page that "dune" is a landform, not a landcover, but this was reverted. On 8/16/19, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> " it would probably be a lot of work to do this practically" > > That's never stopped me before! :-) > >> Take all tagging documentation from the wiki no matter where it is and >> remove everything that is not strictly documenting the de facto meaning of >> tags in the OSM database the result > would be a pretty compact body of documentation. > > Are you suggesting making Tag: or Key: pages for all of the proposed > tags/keys which are being used? That sounds like a lot of work. > > Wouldn't it be easier to mark crazy/theoretical/bad/abandoned > proposals as "abandoned" and archive them, and then make it easier to > search the wiki, including all the proposed features, rather than > moving them all to a different wiki namespace? > > Or perhaps you are suggesting going through the current Tag: and Key: > pages and removing all of the non-factual information, including some > pages which are opinion or recommendations. > > While this would make a few of the pages shorter, it wouldn't > significantly reduce the number of pages or the number of tags and > keys documented in the wiki. Just the Map Features page alone, which > is only a small subset of the documented tags and keys, is quite > lengthy at the moment, and it's just descriptions of each approved or > de facto tag (plus a few others that are in use) > > On 8/16/19, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote: >> >> The problem about proposal pages is that they can be infinitely >> theoretical, non-verifiable or outright insane. So telling a mapper >> who is thinking about inventing a new tag to search the proposals if >> there is one that already covers what they want to do is not >> practicable. Because even if there is a proposal that deals with the >> same kind of situation the mapper is confronted with that does not mean >> the proposal contains a practicable idea of how to tag this. >> >> The advisable approach to making tag documentation on the wiki better >> usable is IMO not to further blur the line between documentation of the >> de facto meaning of tags by humans and all the other uses of the wiki >> (like proposals, automatically assembled data etc.) but more strictly >> separating them. If you (theoretically - it would probably be a lot of >> work to do this practically) take all tagging documentation from the >> wiki no matter where it is and remove everything that is not strictly >> documenting the de facto meaning of tags in the OSM database the result >> would be a pretty compact body of documentation. >> >> -- >> Christoph Hormann >> http://www.imagico.de/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
