Similar problems with other features.
Possibly use a site relation?
Map each individual parcel as a simple way with the reference.
Then place each parcel into a site relation and then the common tags on
the site relation.
Something like that, look up the site relation on the wiki for details,
masy only be a proposal.
On 10/10/19 07:04, Leif Rasmussen wrote:
I'd go with landuse=forestry on the property, a tag that was suggested
here a while back. This isn't official or anything, but moving
towards tagging forest parcels differently from the trees seems important.
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, 3:32 PM Mateusz Konieczny
<matkoni...@tutanota.com <mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>> wrote:
9 Oct 2019, 18:11 by pene...@live.fr <mailto:pene...@live.fr>:
Hello, there.
My question is simple: how do we tag such things? The
boundary=forest_compartment relation is not rendered, and what
is rendered is tagging as landuse=forest both the forest and
its parcels, which leads to rendering it twice, as you can see
here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6086515 Besides,
such forest are often mistagged for the renderer: as the
contributor wants the parcel number rendered, he puts it in
the name tag, not in the ref tag, to which I assume it should
belong.
So, is there an "official"/recommended/widespread way to tag
forest parcels, their number and them belonging to a forest?
boundary=forest_compartment?
Is there anything wrong with this tagging
scheme (except that mapping this
kind of info seems a bit dubious to me).
All problems that you mention are
about tagging for renderer.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
