Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

Hi Joost, Yes, I'm interested in your land-use analysis that you did. Did you share or present the code somewhere? Maybe we can plan smthg for the next FOSS4G.be event? A discussion about a tag "forest_management_style=*"? Wow, it can be dangerous, especially if we have hunting supporters vs

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

I have no problem to use landuse=forest, and not natural=wood for any patch that is "big enough". I would not use it in gardens, especially not private garden. I would try to avoid using it when natural=tree_row is the better choice. I think landuse=residential is wrong under amenity=school,

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

That's definitely an interesting answer. It seems that dividing the large landuse=residential is something that we should do (as it seems logical, even if can be tedious sometimes). I did some digging into the wiki for trees tagging and came to these conclusions. When we think about the key

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

Here is one answer I got, Martin was so kind to put it into a diary entry: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dieterdreist/diary/40993 On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Marc Gemis wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Lionel Giard wrote: >> But

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Lionel Giard wrote: > But for the roads, ideally, it should ideally be an area (like on the GRB of > Vlaandereen or the PICC of Wallonia) with also the existing line to allow > routing. I don't know, if we must change existing residential

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

I understand your point, and that's why we should say if something must be done or not : describing the best practices. For landuse inside an existing residential area, it is always possible to just change the residential zone into a multipolygon relation and make the new landuse (like the park)

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

the landuse under roads should be highway, this has been discussed in the past. Never got popular. Alternative is area:highway, which is more popular I believe. But you won't split the current residential areas on each street, would you ? I think overlaying landuse=residential with leisure=park

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

Personally, i put Nature reserve on a special relation, as it is described on the wiki, like this one : http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7130732#map=17/50.68519/4.70461 And the forest or other landuses are just part of this multipolygon. In this example, i also have a multipolygon for the

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:50 PM, joost schouppe wrote: > The examples you give are already hard work to think about. Much more basic > mistakes are made too: e.g. a forest is also a nature reserve. But then > someone turns the forest into a multipolygon, because there is

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

2017-04-27 13:14 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis : > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:03 AM, joost schouppe > wrote: > > So then you need to decide if a park in a residential area is a park or a > > residential area. > > aren't park and residential area 2 different

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:03 AM, joost schouppe wrote: > So then you need to decide if a park in a residential area is a park or a > residential area. aren't park and residential area 2 different "layers" ? I hope that one day we can map a park as landuse=recreation

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

Hi Julien, * How would you feel about building a proposal about forest_management_style=* ? To my great surprise, I noticed I kind of like mingling in the endless discussions at the tagging mailing list. So I would be willing to help out. * Quantitative analysis of landuse mapping in Belgium: I

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

See, we really have no clue what we're doing :) But maybe we should do this discussion in a separate thread 2017-04-26 12:18 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis : > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:26 AM, joost schouppe > wrote: > > * About OSM.be: we're still

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:26 AM, joost schouppe wrote: > * About OSM.be: we're still thinking about what exactly we want to use the > Projects for - the fact we don't really know was shown quite clearly by > Marc's latest article. which was not placed under Projects

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

* About forests, I tend to agree with the natural=wood not really existing in Belgium. The only exception I know of is a bit of the Zoniënwoud (Kersselaerplein) that has had "zero management" for 34 years now. But most natural=wood I've seen is wrong. Just recently, I changed the Bois de La

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

Julien, and others, thanks a lot for this text. I still have to go through all the details, but here are already some remarks. - Me too, would love to see landuse=forest be used in a more strict way, only for areas where timber is really used for commercial purposes. It's even possible that at

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

Hi, Concerning the wood-tag : I was personally using the first approach Here where it says that natural=wood is for area covered by tree, and natural=forest is for area managed for land forestry (like plantation in the Ardennes). And most of the time,

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

Hi, One remark for the wood-tag: The tag natural=wood is sometimes used for forests, but since natural=wood would refers to unmanaged, natural forests, IMHO it should not be used in Belgium since no more forests are completely natural:

[OSM-talk-be] Land-use mapping with OSM in Belgium

Hi list, Following some discussions about landuse=farmland|meadow some times ago in this list, I've written an article here ( http://www.nobohan.be/2017/04/20/landuse-osm-belgium/) about land-use mapping in Belgium: what could be the best practices adapted to the Belgian landscape. Of course,