On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 8:15 PM Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > You can just overlap them. Don't worry too much about how OpenStreetMap carto > renders it, as long as they way you map it makes sense and matches reality. > Perhaps we can fix the rendering if the current results are causing > confusion, so that the trees only show when the green background shows.
Like Steve, I tend to overlap land use and land cover - which are two distinct things. I use 'landuse=forest' for 'the land is dedicated to the production of forest products'. Around here, such lands often, perhaps even usually, have a secondary purpose of public recreation. This is true even of privately-held ones; there are significant access easements, for instance, to the forests owned in the Adirondacks by the paper companies. I've certainly hiked on land owned by Finch Pruyn (when it was still a going concern) and International Paper. I use 'natural=wood' for 'this land is tree covered', and don't follow the convention that some mappers do that it must be in some sense a 'natural' wood, and 'unmanaged', whatever that means. (In my part of the world, the wilderness areas are among the most intensively managed land in the country - to protect them!) The strict taxonomists object to my use of 'landuse=forest' to denote the land use - and want to require trees on every square metre. But that's not the way a working forest works. In any given year, a given piece of acreage may be grassland, scrub, marsh, open water, alder thicket, or mature trees, depending on how long it's been since harvest and what the beavers have been up to that year. Despite the awkward rendering, I do not cut the water and wetlands out of a forest like https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6378266 - because the whole thing is working forest, and the beaver activity changes, so those ponds and marshes are actually less permanent than the use to which the humans put the land. 'natural=wood' may overlay atop different land uses. The grounds of the mansion at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148531875 are largely forested, and have a 'natural=wood' polygon overlaid, which also extends over some of the adjoining protected_areas. (The mansion grounds are not hard to trace in the field, since the NO TRESPASSING posters can be spotted from the trails on all four sides.) The industrial areas like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/479164244 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7464551 are also partly wooded - largely because in this part of the world, vacant land grows to trees. On other industrial sites, the gaps between buildings may be grass, or bare dirt, or scrub land, or rubbish heaps, but here it becomes either woodland or wetland. I don't map orchards or forests as 'farmland'. I don't mind layering farm buiildings, residences, or greenhouses on top of 'farmland', and don't make cutouts for them, but the renderers are happier with me if I call orchards and forests separate things. -- 73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
