Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-07-14 23:10 GMT+02:00 Dudley Ibbett :

> I'm trying to work out exactly how a generic "field" would be mapped using
> this new tag.



I'm using landuse=farmland on the individual field, and there are other
mappers who do the same around here. You can add crop=* to specify the crop
if you like.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Clifford Snow]

Wouldn't adding attributes solve the problem you described? I.e. field
border=*
On Jul 14, 2014 2:11 PM, "Dudley Ibbett"  wrote:

> Hi
>
> I'm trying to work out exactly how a generic "field" would be mapped using
> this new tag.  I am assuming you would have a way that marks the field
> boundary and in many cases this would be tagged with the
> barrier=fence/wall/hedge.  This is what much or my mapping currently
> consists of.   What is enclosed by the field boundary is arguably the
> "field" but it seems the use of landuse=field for such an area isn't
> encouraged where the wiki is concerned.  With this new tag presumably you
> would mark out any areas of "field margin" with any appropriate additional
> tag to describe what is in the field margin.  The area left within the
> "field" would then be tagged with the "crop".
>
> Field margins have a much "tighter" definition in the UK, most likely due
> to the use of payments to encourage farmers to create these for
> conservation purposes.   Wood and scrub wouldn't fall under this
> definition, nor would hedges so I wouldn't be keen to see these additional
> tags used.  Hedges vary considerably in size around where I live depending
> on whether they are cut regularly or not but they are still hedges and not
> field margins.  Natural tree rows are also found quite commonly along
> rivers and streams that form field boundaries.  natural=tree_row fits with
> this feature as they are not field margins.
>
> Would it not be better to have a "tighter" definition of this particular
> "field" feature when it comes to the use of any additional tags?
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Dudley
> ------
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 16:11:49 +0200
> From: m...@simon-wuellhorst.de
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders
>
> Hello,
> thanks for your feedback. I created a proposed features page for
> fieldmargins where I wrote down my ideas about this topic.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/fieldmargin
>
> Please give me feedback (here or on the wikipage) to improve this propose.
>
> Greetings,
> Simon
>
>
> 2014-07-05 19:00 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
>
>
> > Am 05/lug/2014 um 11:08 schrieb Simon Wüllhorst <
> m...@simon-wuellhorst.de>:
> >
> > Is a proposal-page in the wiki needed?
>
>
>
> It is Not strictly needed (you can use the tag straight away), but it is
> recommended in order to have some documentation remaining. I'd also suggest
> to put a link (see also) on landuse farmland
>
>
> cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ___ Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Dudley Ibbett]

Hi

I'm trying to work out exactly how a generic "field" would be mapped using this 
new tag.  I am assuming you would have a way that marks the field boundary and 
in many cases this would be tagged with the barrier=fence/wall/hedge.  This is 
what much or my mapping currently consists of.   What is enclosed by the field 
boundary is arguably the "field" but it seems the use of landuse=field for such 
an area isn't encouraged where the wiki is concerned.  With this new tag 
presumably you would mark out any areas of "field margin" with any appropriate 
additional tag to describe what is in the field margin.  The area left within 
the "field" would then be tagged with the "crop". 

 Field margins have a much "tighter" definition in the UK, most likely due to 
the use 
of payments to encourage farmers to create these for conservation 
purposes.   Wood and scrub wouldn't fall under this definition, nor would 
hedges so I wouldn't be keen to see these additional tags used.  Hedges vary 
considerably in size around where I live depending on whether they are cut 
regularly or not but they are still hedges and not field margins.  Natural tree 
rows are also found quite commonly along rivers and streams that form field 
boundaries.  natural=tree_row fits with this feature as they are not field 
margins.

Would it not be better to have a "tighter" definition of this particular 
"field" feature when it comes to the use of any additional tags?

Kind Regards

Dudley
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 16:11:49 +0200
From: m...@simon-wuellhorst.de
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

Hello,thanks for your feedback. I created a proposed features page for 
fieldmargins where I wrote down my ideas about this topic. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/fieldmargin 

Please give me feedback (here or on the wikipage) to improve this propose.
Greetings,Simon

2014-07-05 19:00 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :





> Am 05/lug/2014 um 11:08 schrieb Simon Wüllhorst :

>

> Is a proposal-page in the wiki needed?







It is Not strictly needed (you can use the tag straight away), but it is 
recommended in order to have some documentation remaining. I'd also suggest to 
put a link (see also) on landuse farmland





cheers,

Martin

___

Tagging mailing list

Tagging@openstreetmap.org

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Simon Wüllhorst]

Hello,
thanks for your feedback. I created a proposed features page for
fieldmargins where I wrote down my ideas about this topic.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/fieldmargin

Please give me feedback (here or on the wikipage) to improve this propose.

Greetings,
Simon


2014-07-05 19:00 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

>
>
> > Am 05/lug/2014 um 11:08 schrieb Simon Wüllhorst <
> m...@simon-wuellhorst.de>:
> >
> > Is a proposal-page in the wiki needed?
>
>
>
> It is Not strictly needed (you can use the tag straight away), but it is
> recommended in order to have some documentation remaining. I'd also suggest
> to put a link (see also) on landuse farmland
>
>
> cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Kytömaa Lauri]

Simon Wüllhorst wrote:
>I was a bit confused about the inconsistent usage of landuse and natural tag. 
>Sometimes it’s not clear why there is used the natural or landuse key. 

Landuse and natural tags have different keys, so that
you can have both; they describe different properties.
It's just that often or sometimes some landuse values 
virtually always imply some natural elements within that
area, so we don't even bother tagging them. E.g. 
farmland is just landuse=farm, without natural=wheat 
or similar, or a landuse=quarry is without 
natural=bedrock or similar.

>For forrest you have both (landuse=forrest and natural=wood) but it seems to 
>be the only one where you can decide whether it is managed or not.

The forest vs. wood is a bad example anyway, since
years back somebody made a mass edit and nobody
noticed back then that you can have an area used for 
forestry (landuse=forest), that doesn't have trees 
(natural=wood) in it for several years; when the area
has been clearcut / had a full chop recently. I.e. the
combination of tags is not redundant, which was the
only reason given for the changes back then. The 
original way was to use natural=wood with 
landuse=forest, or by itself; many still use them like 
that.

So, for the field borders, one could pick any or several
out of (at least) the following:
* natural=scrub
* natural=grassland
* landuse=meadow (meadows exist that aren't for
hay harvesting)
* natural=meadow

Even other tags may be suitable, depending on local 
ecological conditions.

-- 
Alv
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

> Am 05/lug/2014 um 11:08 schrieb Simon Wüllhorst :
> 
> Is a proposal-page in the wiki needed?



It is Not strictly needed (you can use the tag straight away), but it is 
recommended in order to have some documentation remaining. I'd also suggest to 
put a link (see also) on landuse farmland


cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Simon Wüllhorst]

Ok, you’re right.
I was a bit confused about the inconsistent usage of landuse and natural
tag. Sometimes it’s not clear why there is used the natural or landuse key.
For forrest you have both (landuse=forrest and natural=wood) but it seems
to be the only one where you can decide whether it is managed or not.

So I thought a new key would fix it in my case. But it seems to be a
general problem, so it should discussed about in general and not in my
specific topic.

That means I agree with you. Option 1 or 2 would be the best choice. In my
opinion the options only should be recommendations, the user should be free
to decide the best option by himself.

So what is the next step for me? How can I announce this value? Is a
proposal-page in the wiki needed?

Greetings
Simon/descilla


2014-06-29 21:30 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

>
>
> > Il giorno 29/giu/2014, alle ore 20:09, Simon Wüllhorst <
> m...@simon-wuellhorst.de> ha scritto:
> >
> > What do you think about theses options?
>
>
> I prefer options 1 and 2 as I don't think that "trees" or "scrub" are
> (sub)types of this feature, they are rather orthogonal ways of
> seeing/describing the same spot of land.
>
> cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

> Il giorno 29/giu/2014, alle ore 20:09, Simon Wüllhorst 
>  ha scritto:
> 
> What do you think about theses options?


I prefer options 1 and 2 as I don't think that "trees" or "scrub" are 
(sub)types of this feature, they are rather orthogonal ways of 
seeing/describing the same spot of land.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Simon Wüllhorst]

Hey folks,

first of all thanks for your replies.

I really want to establish a new tag for fieldborders. I would suggest
landuse=fieldmargin. Most of times they are managed so the landuse key
would be the best choice.

There should also be a way to describe the type of fieldmargin (e. g.
scrubs, trees,..). I found different ways to do that. I visualized it here
for some examples:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/b/b4/Fieldmargins.png

- First of all I described the current way to tag fieldmargins.
- Option 1 uses the same tags as currently used but adds an additional
landuse=fieldmargin (less inversive).
- Option 2 uses the landuse=fieldmargin tag and uses the landcover tag if
possible otherwise the current used tag (see image to understand ;) ).
- Option 3 (my preferred) uses landuse=fieldmargin and a new key named
margin to specify the type of fieldmargin (e.g. fieldmargin=trees).

I prefer Option 3 because all types of fieldmargins a described with the
same key therefore they easily can be combined (if the fieldmargin is grown
by different types, e.g. fieldmargin=trees;bank. Furthermore it prevents of
a wrong usage of other keys (e.g. a wall is not a barrier in case of a
fieldmargin).

What do you think about theses options? Are you interested in creating a
feature request? Please let me know.

Greetings
Simon/descilla


2014-06-15 15:44 GMT+02:00 fly :

> Hey list
>
> Am 14.06.2014 09:01, schrieb Dudley Ibbett:
> > In the UK what you describe sounds like a “field margin”.
> >
> > Here is an example web page, but search on google  under “field
> > margins”
> > for more information.
> >
> > http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/wildlife/habitats/arable-field-margins
> >
> > Farmers generally cultivate up to the field boundaries in the UK but
> > there have been schemes to encourage them to leave “field margins”  to
> > support wildlife.
>
> Think we first have to get the tagging of landuse in general more
> consistent. In my region I still find it connected with highways. One
> user even did start to tag landuse as multipolygon-relations using the
> highways and therefor did split the highways in lots of short parts.
>
> As landcover=* is not rendered nor supported by many software, people
> use landuse=grass or even natural=grassland for small stripes of grass
> next to the road.
>
> The major question we have to solve is where does landuse end.
> * we do not have a tag for landuse=highway/road. Where does the highway
> end ?
> * where does landuse=farmland end ? In my opinion the field margin is
> still part of the farmland
> * how to handle tracks between fields ? There are some tracks which move
> from year to year
>
> All together I think the field margin can be tagged already using
> landcover=*, but if you want to tag it explicit you could think about a
> complete new tag like field_margin=yes or farmland=field_margin.
>
> Just my two cents
>
> fly
>
> > Am 13.06.2014 14:35, schrieb Simone Saviolo:
> >> 2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst  >>
> >> currently I’m tagging the country around my place (farmland,
> >> farmyards, meadow and so on). Farmlands are typically surrounded
> >> or seperated by small areas/borders of several vegetations (trees
> >> bushes, at least in Germany), called Field Borders (or Feldrain
> >> in German, more Informations:
> http://extension.missouri.edu/p/g9421or
> >> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldrain). They are important for
> >> farmers (to improve crops growth) and they also useful for a
> >> better orientation and navigation in this country.
> >>
> >>
> >> I started a thread on forum.osm.org  (It’s
> >> a german thread, so if you have questions, please ask me) to get
> >> tips for the correct/ideal tagging of these areas
> >> (important:it’s an area, not a way!).
> >>
> >>
> >> In summary I got a lot of suggestions, for example natural=scrub
> >> or natural=wood, ….
> >>
> >>
> >> The problem of all these suggestions were, they all describe the
> >> type of vegetation and not the purpose of these areas. Besides >>
> the vegetation of these areas are much various, so you can’t
> >> describe them by using one or two “vegetation”-tags.
> >>
> >>
> >> According to the post of “dieterdreist”
> >> (http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=422045#p422045) I
> >> thought about to create/use a completely new tag/value.
> >>
> >>
> >> At this point I’m not shure which key would be correct. I’m
> >> thinking about natural=fieldborder or landuse=fieldborder. On
> >> the one landuse=fieldborder seems to be the better choise,
> >> because field
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[fly]

Hey list

Am 14.06.2014 09:01, schrieb Dudley Ibbett:
> In the UK what you describe sounds like a “field margin”.
>
> Here is an example web page, but search on google  under “field
> margins”
> for more information.
>
> http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/wildlife/habitats/arable-field-margins
>
> Farmers generally cultivate up to the field boundaries in the UK but
> there have been schemes to encourage them to leave “field margins”  to
> support wildlife.

Think we first have to get the tagging of landuse in general more
consistent. In my region I still find it connected with highways. One
user even did start to tag landuse as multipolygon-relations using the
highways and therefor did split the highways in lots of short parts.

As landcover=* is not rendered nor supported by many software, people
use landuse=grass or even natural=grassland for small stripes of grass
next to the road.

The major question we have to solve is where does landuse end.
* we do not have a tag for landuse=highway/road. Where does the highway
end ?
* where does landuse=farmland end ? In my opinion the field margin is
still part of the farmland
* how to handle tracks between fields ? There are some tracks which move
from year to year

All together I think the field margin can be tagged already using
landcover=*, but if you want to tag it explicit you could think about a
complete new tag like field_margin=yes or farmland=field_margin.

Just my two cents

fly

> Am 13.06.2014 14:35, schrieb Simone Saviolo:
>> 2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst >
>> currently I’m tagging the country around my place (farmland,
>> farmyards, meadow and so on). Farmlands are typically surrounded
>> or seperated by small areas/borders of several vegetations (trees
>> bushes, at least in Germany), called Field Borders (or Feldrain
>> in German, more Informations: http://extension.missouri.edu/p/g9421or
>> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldrain). They are important for
>> farmers (to improve crops growth) and they also useful for a
>> better orientation and navigation in this country.
>>
>>
>> I started a thread on forum.osm.org  (It’s
>> a german thread, so if you have questions, please ask me) to get
>> tips for the correct/ideal tagging of these areas
>> (important:it’s an area, not a way!).
>>
>>
>> In summary I got a lot of suggestions, for example natural=scrub
>> or natural=wood, ….
>>
>>
>> The problem of all these suggestions were, they all describe the
>> type of vegetation and not the purpose of these areas. Besides >>
the vegetation of these areas are much various, so you can’t
>> describe them by using one or two “vegetation”-tags.
>>
>>
>> According to the post of “dieterdreist”
>> (http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=422045#p422045) I
>> thought about to create/use a completely new tag/value.
>>
>>
>> At this point I’m not shure which key would be correct. I’m
>> thinking about natural=fieldborder or landuse=fieldborder. On
>> the one landuse=fieldborder seems to be the better choise,
>> because field

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Dudley Ibbett]

In the UK what you describe sounds like a “field margin”.  



Here is an example web page, but search on google  under “field margins” for 
more information.  

http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/wildlife/habitats/arable-field-margins

Farmers generally cultivate up to the field boundaries in the UK but there have 
been schemes to encourage them to leave “field margins”  to support wildlife.


Regards


Dudley






Sent from Windows Mail





From: Yves
Sent: ‎Friday‎, ‎13‎ ‎June‎ ‎2014 ‎15‎:‎33
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools, Simone Saviolo



Field border literally means the border of a field, so I fear the tag meaning 
is not as clear as it should.



On 13 juin 2014 14:35:34 UTC+02:00, Simone Saviolo  
wrote:

2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst :



Hello Guys,

currently I’m tagging the country around my place (farmland, farmyards, meadow 
and so on). Farmlands are typically surrounded or seperated by small 
areas/borders of several vegetations (trees bushes, at least in Germany), 
called Field Borders (or Feldrain in German, more Informations: 
http://extension.missouri.edu/p/g9421 or 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldrain). They are important for farmers (to 
improve crops growth) and they also useful for a better orientation and 
navigation in this country.


I started a thread on forum.osm.org (It’s a german thread, so if you have 
questions, please ask me) to get tips for the correct/ideal tagging of these 
areas (important:it’s an area, not a way!). 


In summary I got a lot of suggestions, for example natural=scrub or 
natural=wood, ….


The problem of all these suggestions were, they all describe the type of 
vegetation and not the purpose of these areas. Besides the vegetation of these 
areas are much various, so you can’t describe them by using one or two 
“vegetation”-tags.


According to the post of “dieterdreist” 
(http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=422045#p422045) I thought 
about to create/use a completely new tag/value.


At this point I’m not shure which key would be correct. I’m thinking about 
natural=fieldborder or landuse=fieldborder. On the one landuse=fieldborder 
seems to be the better choise, because field borders have got a farming 
purpose. But on the other hand they are grown as they are and are not really 
managed.


So what whould be your favourite key/value for Filed Borders or what are you 
thinking about this topic in general.


PS: After the latest update of the mapnik style farmlands/farmyards are 
sourrounded by a little border. Some people say that would be raise the 
motivation to create smaller seperations of farmland-areas (an own 
farmland-area for every farmland and not a farmland-area for a whole region). 
In my opinion the inroduciton of a Filed Border tag would support these idea, 
too.




I'm a big supporter of small farmland areas too, and I'm starting to pay more 
attention to what lies between a field and its neighbour. In my case, though, 
most fields are rice fields, which are only separated by a small earth levee 
(http://www.ecori.it/images/gallery/1.jpg). When they're not close to each 
other, it's because a track or a waterway runs in that space. While some of the 
larger levees are often lined with trees or bushes, I'm not sure this would 
still qualify as field border, in the sense of the landuse (in other words, I 
wouldn't think that that vegetation is provided for agricultural/habitat 
reasons, but it may be, I'm no agronomist). Anyway, some such areas have been 
tagged by their vegetation characteristics. 





I think the best solution is to provide both tags, one about the vegetation, 
one about its agricultural function, as these two functions are largely 
orthogonal in my view. 




Ciao,




Simone




Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9 Mail. Excusez la brièveté.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Yves]

Field border literally means the border of a field, so I fear the tag meaning 
is not as clear as it should.


On 13 juin 2014 14:35:34 UTC+02:00, Simone Saviolo  
wrote:
>2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst :
>
>> Hello Guys,
>>
>> currently I’m tagging the country around my place (farmland,
>farmyards,
>> meadow and so on). Farmlands are typically surrounded or seperated by
>small
>> areas/borders of several vegetations (trees bushes, at least in
>Germany),
>> called Field Borders (or Feldrain in German, more Informations:
>> http://extension.missouri.edu/p/g9421 or
>> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldrain). They are important for
>farmers
>> (to improve crops growth) and they also useful for a better
>orientation and
>> navigation in this country.
>>
>> I started a thread on forum.osm.org (It’s a german thread, so if you
>have
>> questions, please ask me) to get tips for the correct/ideal tagging
>of
>> these areas (important:it’s an area, not a way!).
>>
>> In summary I got a lot of suggestions, for example natural=scrub or
>> natural=wood, ….
>>
>> The problem of all these suggestions were, they all describe the type
>of
>> vegetation and not the purpose of these areas. Besides the vegetation
>of
>> these areas are much various, so you can’t describe them by using one
>or
>> two “vegetation”-tags.
>>
>> According to the post of “dieterdreist” (
>> http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=422045#p422045) I
>> thought about to create/use a completely new tag/value.
>>
>> At this point I’m not shure which key would be correct. I’m thinking
>about
>> natural=fieldborder or landuse=fieldborder. On the one
>landuse=fieldborder
>> seems to be the better choise, because field borders have got a
>farming
>> purpose. But on the other hand they are grown as they are and are not
>> really managed.
>>
>> So what whould be your favourite key/value for Filed Borders or what
>are
>> you thinking about this topic in general.
>>
>> PS: After the latest update of the mapnik style farmlands/farmyards
>are
>> sourrounded by a little border. Some people say that would be raise
>the
>> motivation to create smaller seperations of farmland-areas (an own
>> farmland-area for every farmland and not a farmland-area for a whole
>> region). In my opinion the inroduciton of a Filed Border tag would
>support
>> these idea, too.
>>
>
>I'm a big supporter of small farmland areas too, and I'm starting to
>pay
>more attention to what lies between a field and its neighbour. In my
>case,
>though, most fields are rice fields, which are only separated by a
>small
>earth levee (http://www.ecori.it/images/gallery/1.jpg). When they're
>not
>close to each other, it's because a track or a waterway runs in that
>space.
>While some of the larger levees are often lined with trees or bushes,
>I'm
>not sure this would still qualify as field border, in the sense of the
>landuse (in other words, I wouldn't think that that vegetation is
>provided
>for agricultural/habitat reasons, but it may be, I'm no agronomist).
>Anyway, some such areas have been tagged by their vegetation
>characteristics.
>
>I think the best solution is to provide both tags, one about the
>vegetation, one about its agricultural function, as these two functions
>are
>largely orthogonal in my view.
>
>Ciao,
>
>Simone
>
>
>
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9 Mail. Excusez la brièveté.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Simone Saviolo]

2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst :

> Hello Guys,
>
> currently I’m tagging the country around my place (farmland, farmyards,
> meadow and so on). Farmlands are typically surrounded or seperated by small
> areas/borders of several vegetations (trees bushes, at least in Germany),
> called Field Borders (or Feldrain in German, more Informations:
> http://extension.missouri.edu/p/g9421 or
> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldrain). They are important for farmers
> (to improve crops growth) and they also useful for a better orientation and
> navigation in this country.
>
> I started a thread on forum.osm.org (It’s a german thread, so if you have
> questions, please ask me) to get tips for the correct/ideal tagging of
> these areas (important:it’s an area, not a way!).
>
> In summary I got a lot of suggestions, for example natural=scrub or
> natural=wood, ….
>
> The problem of all these suggestions were, they all describe the type of
> vegetation and not the purpose of these areas. Besides the vegetation of
> these areas are much various, so you can’t describe them by using one or
> two “vegetation”-tags.
>
> According to the post of “dieterdreist” (
> http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=422045#p422045) I
> thought about to create/use a completely new tag/value.
>
> At this point I’m not shure which key would be correct. I’m thinking about
> natural=fieldborder or landuse=fieldborder. On the one landuse=fieldborder
> seems to be the better choise, because field borders have got a farming
> purpose. But on the other hand they are grown as they are and are not
> really managed.
>
> So what whould be your favourite key/value for Filed Borders or what are
> you thinking about this topic in general.
>
> PS: After the latest update of the mapnik style farmlands/farmyards are
> sourrounded by a little border. Some people say that would be raise the
> motivation to create smaller seperations of farmland-areas (an own
> farmland-area for every farmland and not a farmland-area for a whole
> region). In my opinion the inroduciton of a Filed Border tag would support
> these idea, too.
>

I'm a big supporter of small farmland areas too, and I'm starting to pay
more attention to what lies between a field and its neighbour. In my case,
though, most fields are rice fields, which are only separated by a small
earth levee (http://www.ecori.it/images/gallery/1.jpg). When they're not
close to each other, it's because a track or a waterway runs in that space.
While some of the larger levees are often lined with trees or bushes, I'm
not sure this would still qualify as field border, in the sense of the
landuse (in other words, I wouldn't think that that vegetation is provided
for agricultural/habitat reasons, but it may be, I'm no agronomist).
Anyway, some such areas have been tagged by their vegetation
characteristics.

I think the best solution is to provide both tags, one about the
vegetation, one about its agricultural function, as these two functions are
largely orthogonal in my view.

Ciao,

Simone
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

[Simon Wüllhorst]

Hello Guys,

currently I’m tagging the country around my place (farmland, farmyards,
meadow and so on). Farmlands are typically surrounded or seperated by small
areas/borders of several vegetations (trees bushes, at least in Germany),
called Field Borders (or Feldrain in German, more Informations:
http://extension.missouri.edu/p/g9421 or
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldrain). They are important for farmers (to
improve crops growth) and they also useful for a better orientation and
navigation in this country.

I started a thread on forum.osm.org (It’s a german thread, so if you have
questions, please ask me) to get tips for the correct/ideal tagging of
these areas (important:it’s an area, not a way!).

In summary I got a lot of suggestions, for example natural=scrub or
natural=wood, ….

The problem of all these suggestions were, they all describe the type of
vegetation and not the purpose of these areas. Besides the vegetation of
these areas are much various, so you can’t describe them by using one or
two “vegetation”-tags.

According to the post of “dieterdreist” (
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=422045#p422045) I thought
about to create/use a completely new tag/value.

At this point I’m not shure which key would be correct. I’m thinking about
natural=fieldborder or landuse=fieldborder. On the one landuse=fieldborder
seems to be the better choise, because field borders have got a farming
purpose. But on the other hand they are grown as they are and are not
really managed.

So what whould be your favourite key/value for Filed Borders or what are
you thinking about this topic in general.

PS: After the latest update of the mapnik style farmlands/farmyards are
sourrounded by a little border. Some people say that would be raise the
motivation to create smaller seperations of farmland-areas (an own
farmland-area for every farmland and not a farmland-area for a whole
region). In my opinion the inroduciton of a Filed Border tag would support
these idea, too.

Greetings from Germany

(sorry for my bad english)

descilla/Simon Wüllhorst
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging