There was a lot mentioned in your email. The DBH matter is no longer an issue as we are now using the circumference tag which is pretty much universal for all trees in OSM. The tree numbers (ref tag) are remaining as is. It's the only unique number identifying the trees, and there are even other websites using this dataset that use those numbers. And as you mentioned, some trees are even physically tagged. The English/common names for the trees were provided by the City of Ottawa dataset. These are the names that the Forestry Services used.
You also mention conflating with current data and it seems there was a misunderstanding. I can guarantee that many of the trees currently in OSM will conflict with the ones being added which was addressed in the wiki. They have no tags so the only conflict is simply having a duplicate tree. Of all the trees currently in Ottawa, there are 3 that actually have data tagged (species tags). These 3 trees are nowhere near the ones being added so they are of no concern. I also sorted the trees by thickness and there was a noticeable jump in diameter. 149,139 trees gradually increase from 0m to 9m circumference (This looks like a horizontal line on a graph), there is a jump to the next thickest at 14m in circumference. The remaining 6 trees seem unrealistically thick. The thickest being 55m in diameter. A graph would basically look like this: ____| The wiki has been updated to include this data. We'll simply add a fixme tag indicating a ground survey needs to be done to these trees to verify/correct their thickness.
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
