Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Markus]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 20:43, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:
>
> On 04.10.2019 19:10, Markus wrote:
> > While orchard=meadow_orchard is the most used way of tagging a meadow 
> > orchard (2 748 uses), there
> > are also 668 uses of the other subtag meadow=meadow_orchard. That means 
> > that people don't agree that
> > the orchard is more important than the meadow.
>
> Apparently there is a semantic difference. When someone counts 3 apple trees 
> on a hectare, it is
> more a meadow. If there are 35 varieties of old sorts in the backyard, it is 
> more an orchard, and
> the farmer needs the small mower to cut the grass.
>
> Thus the subtagging allows to preserve the subtle differences, while a new 
> catch-all high-level tag
> doesn't. Subtle, from Latin subtilis ‘fine, delicate.’ ;-)

I agree that there such differentiation in tagging would make sense in
these extreme cases and i hope that mappers had this in mind and
didn't just randomly choose a subtag.

However, at many places it's impossible to say which land use is more
dominant (example: [1]). How to tag these? I were very surprised if
these places make only 1.4% (= share of landuse=meadow_orchard in all
three tags) of all meadow orchards.

[1]: 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gebenstorf_Blühende_Kirschbäume_1874.JPG

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 04.10.2019 19:10, Markus wrote:
While orchard=meadow_orchard is the most used way of tagging a meadow orchard (2 748 uses), there 
are also 668 uses of the other subtag meadow=meadow_orchard. That means that people don't agree that 
the orchard is more important than the meadow.


Apparently there is a semantic difference. When someone counts 3 apple trees on a hectare, it is 
more a meadow. If there are 35 varieties of old sorts in the backyard, it is more an orchard, and 
the farmer needs the small mower to cut the grass.


Thus the subtagging allows to preserve the subtle differences, while a new catch-all high-level tag 
doesn't. Subtle, from Latin subtilis ‘fine, delicate.’ ;-)




Compared to landuse=meadow_orchard (48 uses), the two subtags certainly only have such a high usage 
because they render, while landuse=meadow_orchard doesn't.


They render for a reason, because they represent major types of landuse.

tom



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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Markus]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2019, 16:18 Tom Pfeifer,  wrote:

> I reviewed the thread and found the most convincing argument that the
> subtagging solution is already
> the preferred tagging in 2787 cases (according to overpass, most of them
> in Germany). It helps to
> prevent tag fragmentation and will not lead to crying how to render it. I
> also think it is the best
> option semantically.
>
> This contrasts 48 cases of landuse=meadow_orchard, only in DE and CH.


While orchard=meadow_orchard is the most used way of tagging a meadow
orchard (2 748 uses), there are also 668 uses of the other subtag
meadow=meadow_orchard. That means that people don't agree that the orchard
is more important than the meadow.

Compared to landuse=meadow_orchard (48 uses), the two subtags certainly
only have such a high usage because they render, while
landuse=meadow_orchard doesn't.

In my opinion, high usage doesn't guarantee that the tagging is sensible.

Markus

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 03.10.2019 21:12, Markus wrote:

How shall we remain now? Can we agree on on a single way of tagging in
order that this discussion doesn't come up again in a year or two?

I still think that landuse=meadow_orchard (as well as
landuse=silvopasture for forest and pasture) is the best option. The
other used or proposed tags demand from mappers that they define which
land use is more important than the other. However, such a choice is
arbitrary.


I reviewed the thread and found the most convincing argument that the subtagging solution is already 
the preferred tagging in 2787 cases (according to overpass, most of them in Germany). It helps to 
prevent tag fragmentation and will not lead to crying how to render it. I also think it is the best 
option semantically.


This contrasts 48 cases of landuse=meadow_orchard, only in DE and CH.

tom


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Markus]

How shall we remain now? Can we agree on on a single way of tagging in
order that this discussion doesn't come up again in a year or two?

I still think that landuse=meadow_orchard (as well as
landuse=silvopasture for forest and pasture) is the best option. The
other used or proposed tags demand from mappers that they define which
land use is more important than the other. However, such a choice is
arbitrary.

Best regards
Markus

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 21. Sep 2019, at 01:35, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> And orchard, vineyard and meadow are excluded from landuse=farmland so the 
> 'brush' is not so broad.


actually pasture was there for almost 10 years and only “recently” removed:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Alanduse%3Dfarmland=revision=1690356=1663478

If landuse is for tillage only or mainly, are all areas with livestock meadows 
or farmyards? 
I’ve always seen farmland as a generic term (including orchards and meadows), 
mostly used for fields, but I’ve also used it for cases when I was unsure about 
the specific use, but could see from aerial imagery that it was cultivated land.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Warin]

On 20/09/19 16:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


On 20. Sep 2019, at 02:13, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

Why not landuse=agriculture? As a broad brush it could do well. Could includes 
all types of agriculture practice.


we already have a broad brush for this field: landuse=farmland


And orchard, vineyard and meadow are excluded from landuse=farmland so the 
'brush' is not so broad.



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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Volker Schmidt]

I am not into landseer tagging. But: are the CORINE categories any help:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordination_of_Information_on_the_Environment
?

On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, 08:57 Martin Koppenhoefer, 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 20. Sep 2019, at 02:13, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Why not landuse=agriculture? As a broad brush it could do well. Could
> includes all types of agriculture practice.
>
>
> we already have a broad brush for this field: 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] Tagging meadow orchards

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 20. Sep 2019, at 02:13, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Why not landuse=agriculture? As a broad brush it could do well. Could 
> includes all types of agriculture practice.


we already have a broad brush for this field: landuse=farmland

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Warin]

On 19/09/19 18:49, Volker Schmidt wrote:
we may have to byte the bullet and allow semicolon-separated values 
for landuse. Specific word combinations are not a good solution


OSM uses landuse=residential as a broad brush that includes recreation 
and commercial uses. It includes various densities of population.


Why not landuse=agriculture? As a broad brush it could do well. Could 
includes all types of agriculture practice.


If the output of the area is required then the key produce could be used ..


So far I know of
meadow + fruit trees
bovine pasture + aok trees
grain + olive trees
grain + Almond
pigs + trees

I am sure there are many more.


 
	Virus-free. www.avast.com 
 




On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 09:43, Martin Koppenhoefer 
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:




Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 09:18 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen
mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>>:

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 00:33, Martin Koppenhoefer
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow
orchards. A meadow orchard is specifically low
density/sparse trees, while silvopasture indicates a
forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover.


Really?  I don't see anything in the Wikipedia article that
specifies the tree cover is dense.



I didn't write it was "dense", I wrote it was "denser", compared
to a meadow orchard.

In
fact, it says: "Integrating pasture into existing woodland
presents challenges as well: the woodland
likely needs to be thinned to increase light infiltration"  It
also has pictures of several different
silvopastures, none of which appear to have dense tree cover
throughout.



it is using the term "woodland". For meadow orchards, I would use
the term "meadow" with trees on it. The term "silvo" also is about
a "forest"/woods. Can you see the difference?



Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either
pasture or cutting the grass, while silvopasture implies
pasture.


The trees scattered throughout would make it more economic to
put animals out to pasture on
it than to mow it.  But maybe where you are people do things
the least efficient way.  Even if
that is the case, I doubt that would remain viable for much
longer.

BTW, we're probably fooling ourselves in many cases where we
say a field is pasture or
meadow: it may change from year to year.



places in southern Germany used for pasture are often in
environments where (mechanically) cutting the grass is not
feasible, due to steep terrain, or where mowing does not make a
lot of sense because the soil is quite magre.
My point was that "silvopasture" has different connotations, it is
about (some kind of) forest with animals grazing below, while
meadow orchards is about meadows with sparse (fruit) trees on them
(or sparse orchards on a meadow, if you like to put it the other
way round). Silvopasture requires pasture, meadow orchards don't.

Cheers,
Martin

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


 
	Virus-free. www.avast.com 
 





___
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] Tagging meadow orchards

[Markus]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 16:32, Joseph Eisenberg
 wrote:
>
> Usually the main land use should be the one that is most economically
> important, and also should take up the most land.

Most economically important including or excluding subsidies? In
Switzerland, farmers receive subsidies for standard trees because of
diversity and "landscape quality", that is, because it looks nice.
(I'm not joking.) They probably wouldn't plant standard trees or would
fell them if they didn't receive any subsidies.

Regarding "taking up the most land", the meadow seems to win at meadow orchards.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 12:57 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :

> I didn't write it was "dense", I wrote it was "denser", compared to a
>> meadow orchard.
>>
>
> I see a range of tree densities in the Wikipedia article.
>

> it is using the term "woodland". For meadow orchards, I would use the term
>> "meadow" with trees on it. The term "silvo" also is about a "forest"/woods.
>> Can you see the difference?
>>
>
> And the term "pasture" is about pastures.  Can you see the similarities?
>


pasture is not synonymous to meadow, it is a part of it.



>
> Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either pasture or
>>> cutting the grass, while silvopasture implies pasture.
>>>
>>
> So you object to silvopasture on the grounds that it implies pasture but
> want orchard_meadow
> (which implies meadow) yet just admitted that the meadow in an orchard
> meadow can be
> used either as a meadow OR as a pasture.  If you were being consistent you
> would insist on
> silvomeadowpasture or propose orchard_pasture too.  I suspect that what is
> really behind your
> insistence is you want a literal, word-for-word translation of a German
> term rather than the
> English term for the same thing.
>


the fact that there are different terms for these in German (Streuobstwiese
vs. Hutewald / Waldweide / Hutung) indicates (besides the other criterion)
that they are different concepts.



My point was that "silvopasture" has different connotations, it is about
> (some kind of) forest with animals grazing below,
>


I agree, and this is why it is not the same as a meadow orchard, because a
meadow orchard is not about a kind of forest.


I don't see that connotation.  From the Wikipedia article: "Silvopasture
> can be established by
> planting trees into existing pasture
>  [...]" and "Integrating pasture
> into existing woodland presents
> challenges as well: the woodland likely needs to be thinned to increase
> light infiltration,"
>


You are basing your arguments entirely on wikipedia, but it would not be
the first time that there are errors in a wikipedia article.



Not only does the Wikipedia article state that you can put trees into
> pasture but it shows pictures
> of fields with sparse trees.
>


I admit there are pictures in the article that show trees in a setting that
is quite sparse and may not qualify for the term "forest", but still these
aren't trees that are usually found in an orchard.


Silvopasture requires pasture, meadow orchards don't.
>>
>
A wise man once told me "Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for
> either pasture
> or cutting the grass."  So meadow_orchard is as wrong as silvopasture.
>

no, this is not logical. Please read again what you just wrote.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> irrigated vs non-irrigated crops

That's a good idea. There is a key irrigated=yes/no in use, that can
be added to areas of landuse=farmland, and you can also tag crop=rice
for example. But it needs to be documented with a wiki page:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/irrigated

There's also irrigation=* which can be used to describe the type of
irrigation system? https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/irrigation

> without having to establish a primary and a secondary usage

For understanding land use and also for a reasonable rendering, it's
very helpful to describe the primary use of the land.

There's a big difference between a pasture which has a few trees, and
a forestry area where animals area occasionally allowed to graze.

Usually the main land use should be the one that is most economically
important, and also should take up the most land.

Most database users are going to be interested in the main use of the
land, so it's a good idea to always tag this.

For this reason, semicolon-separated values are not a good idea. They
do not make it clear what should be considered the primary feature of
the area.

> subtags that would have no consequence as to how the map is rendered

Subtags can result in different rendering, if you choose to interpret
the other tags. Any renderer will have to make choices about what tags
should be shown in a particular style.

On 9/19/19, Diego Cruz  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I think that this case and my dehesas pose the same problem, which is that
> the current collection of possible landuses is too narrow. In my opinion
> there are three options:
>
> a) Expand the number of landuse values to adapt to different realities in
> other parts of the world. Apart from dehesas, in Spain (and many other dry
> places), there should be a differentiation between irrigated crops and
> non-irrigated crops (it's a completely different landscape and it's not
> subject to variations), in the same way as there is a difference between
> meadow and pasture (from my climatic point of view they could be considered
> redundant, as they are just grassy places [I know the difference, by the
> way, I'm just trying to prove a point]).
>
> b) Allow for a solution where two or more landuse values are possible,
> without having to establish a primary and a secondary usage, which would
> prove impossible in most cases. It could be rendered with the classic
> stripes of different colours, for example. I'm not an expert and I don't
> know how that could be possible. Maybe with landuse=mixed or
> semicolon-separated values as some colleagues suggest?
>
> c) Adapt to the current structure using subtags that would have no
> consequence as to how the map is rendered (many of us are not satisfied
> with this).
>
> Best regards
> Diego
>
> El jue., 19 sept. 2019 a las 14:23, Joseph Eisenberg (<
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>) escribió:
>
>> I have to disagree with the wikipedia article. Fruit orchards are not
>> frequently mentioned with "silvopasture"
>>
>> Unfortunately, this term is not defined in any of the British English
>> dictionaries that I've found online, or in reliable American English
>> dictionaries. The only online dictionary definitions I found were:
>>
>> "The practice of combining forestry and grazing of domesticated
>> animals" in "yourdictionary.com" and "glosbe.com" - both are the same.
>>
>> The cited wikipedia article links to the USDA (United States
>> Department of Agriculture), which has a whole "Agroforestry" section
>> (another buzzword...), which says:
>>
>> "Silvopasture is the deliberate integration of trees and grazing
>> livestock operations on the same land. These systems are intensively
>> managed for both forest products and forage, providing both short- and
>> long-term income sources."
>> https://www.fs.usda.gov/nac/practices/silvopasture.php
>>
>> So it seems that USDA's definition agrees with what I wrote before:
>> it's for grazing and forest products, not food production in an
>> orchard. Thus "silvopasture" is not a good term to use for places that
>> combine orchards with pasture or meadow; it's likely to cause
>> confusion.
>>
>> The lack of definitions in common dictionaries (and in Google
>> Translate) will also make it hard to find equivalents in other
>> languages.
>>
>> - Joseph
>>
>> On 9/19/19, Paul Allen  wrote:
>> > On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 09:47, Joseph Eisenberg <
>> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Right. Silvopasture combines trees used for forestry with grass for
>> >> grazing.
>> >>
>> >
>> > From the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture:
>> >
>> > Silvopasture is compatible with fruit, nut, and timber production.
>> Grazing
>> > can serve as a cost-effective vegetation and weed control method.
>> > Silvopasture can also help reduce pests and disease in orchards - when
>> > introduced into an orchard after harvest, livestock are able to consume
>> > unharvested fruits, preventing pests and diseases from 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Diego Cruz]

Hi everyone,

I think that this case and my dehesas pose the same problem, which is that
the current collection of possible landuses is too narrow. In my opinion
there are three options:

a) Expand the number of landuse values to adapt to different realities in
other parts of the world. Apart from dehesas, in Spain (and many other dry
places), there should be a differentiation between irrigated crops and
non-irrigated crops (it's a completely different landscape and it's not
subject to variations), in the same way as there is a difference between
meadow and pasture (from my climatic point of view they could be considered
redundant, as they are just grassy places [I know the difference, by the
way, I'm just trying to prove a point]).

b) Allow for a solution where two or more landuse values are possible,
without having to establish a primary and a secondary usage, which would
prove impossible in most cases. It could be rendered with the classic
stripes of different colours, for example. I'm not an expert and I don't
know how that could be possible. Maybe with landuse=mixed or
semicolon-separated values as some colleagues suggest?

c) Adapt to the current structure using subtags that would have no
consequence as to how the map is rendered (many of us are not satisfied
with this).

Best regards
Diego

El jue., 19 sept. 2019 a las 14:23, Joseph Eisenberg (<
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>) escribió:

> I have to disagree with the wikipedia article. Fruit orchards are not
> frequently mentioned with "silvopasture"
>
> Unfortunately, this term is not defined in any of the British English
> dictionaries that I've found online, or in reliable American English
> dictionaries. The only online dictionary definitions I found were:
>
> "The practice of combining forestry and grazing of domesticated
> animals" in "yourdictionary.com" and "glosbe.com" - both are the same.
>
> The cited wikipedia article links to the USDA (United States
> Department of Agriculture), which has a whole "Agroforestry" section
> (another buzzword...), which says:
>
> "Silvopasture is the deliberate integration of trees and grazing
> livestock operations on the same land. These systems are intensively
> managed for both forest products and forage, providing both short- and
> long-term income sources."
> https://www.fs.usda.gov/nac/practices/silvopasture.php
>
> So it seems that USDA's definition agrees with what I wrote before:
> it's for grazing and forest products, not food production in an
> orchard. Thus "silvopasture" is not a good term to use for places that
> combine orchards with pasture or meadow; it's likely to cause
> confusion.
>
> The lack of definitions in common dictionaries (and in Google
> Translate) will also make it hard to find equivalents in other
> languages.
>
> - Joseph
>
> On 9/19/19, Paul Allen  wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 09:47, Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Right. Silvopasture combines trees used for forestry with grass for
> >> grazing.
> >>
> >
> > From the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture:
> >
> > Silvopasture is compatible with fruit, nut, and timber production.
> Grazing
> > can serve as a cost-effective vegetation and weed control method.
> > Silvopasture can also help reduce pests and disease in orchards - when
> > introduced into an orchard after harvest, livestock are able to consume
> > unharvested fruits, preventing pests and diseases from spreading via
> these
> > unharvested fruits and in some cases consuming the pests themselves
> >
> >
> > That means that the trees are used to produce for forestry products:
> >> usually wood or timber, sometimes bark, sap, or other non-food products.
> >>
> >
> > Or fruit.  Or nuts.  As per the Wikipedia article.
> >
> >>
> >> Orchards produce food: usually fruits like bananas, coconuts or oranges,
> >> but also tea leaves, coffee beans, and fruits used for oil like olives
> >> and
> >> oil palms. (According to current osm usage)
> >>
> >
> > See Wikipedia article, and above quotation from it.  Silvopasture
> includes
> > orchards and other food
> > trees.
> >
> > --
> > Paul
> >
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging meadow orchards

[Joseph Eisenberg]

I have to disagree with the wikipedia article. Fruit orchards are not
frequently mentioned with "silvopasture"

Unfortunately, this term is not defined in any of the British English
dictionaries that I've found online, or in reliable American English
dictionaries. The only online dictionary definitions I found were:

"The practice of combining forestry and grazing of domesticated
animals" in "yourdictionary.com" and "glosbe.com" - both are the same.

The cited wikipedia article links to the USDA (United States
Department of Agriculture), which has a whole "Agroforestry" section
(another buzzword...), which says:

"Silvopasture is the deliberate integration of trees and grazing
livestock operations on the same land. These systems are intensively
managed for both forest products and forage, providing both short- and
long-term income sources."
https://www.fs.usda.gov/nac/practices/silvopasture.php

So it seems that USDA's definition agrees with what I wrote before:
it's for grazing and forest products, not food production in an
orchard. Thus "silvopasture" is not a good term to use for places that
combine orchards with pasture or meadow; it's likely to cause
confusion.

The lack of definitions in common dictionaries (and in Google
Translate) will also make it hard to find equivalents in other
languages.

- Joseph

On 9/19/19, Paul Allen  wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 09:47, Joseph Eisenberg 
> wrote:
>
>> Right. Silvopasture combines trees used for forestry with grass for
>> grazing.
>>
>
> From the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture:
>
> Silvopasture is compatible with fruit, nut, and timber production. Grazing
> can serve as a cost-effective vegetation and weed control method.
> Silvopasture can also help reduce pests and disease in orchards - when
> introduced into an orchard after harvest, livestock are able to consume
> unharvested fruits, preventing pests and diseases from spreading via these
> unharvested fruits and in some cases consuming the pests themselves
>
>
> That means that the trees are used to produce for forestry products:
>> usually wood or timber, sometimes bark, sap, or other non-food products.
>>
>
> Or fruit.  Or nuts.  As per the Wikipedia article.
>
>>
>> Orchards produce food: usually fruits like bananas, coconuts or oranges,
>> but also tea leaves, coffee beans, and fruits used for oil like olives
>> and
>> oil palms. (According to current osm usage)
>>
>
> See Wikipedia article, and above quotation from it.  Silvopasture includes
> orchards and other food
> trees.
>
> --
> Paul
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Topographe Fou]

  Oups, wrong key, 32 use of landuse=mixed, sorry. LeTopographeFou   De: letopographe...@gmail.comEnvoyé: 19 septembre 2019 12:53 PMÀ: tagging@openstreetmap.orgObjet: Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchardsAnd what about something like:Landuse=mixed (0 use in taginfo)Landuse:orchard=yesLanduse:meadow=yes   I would prefer that compared to secondary_landuse as it is much more scalable and less conflict-prone.  LeTopographeFou   De:  joseph.eisenb...@gmail.comEnvoyé: 19 septembre 2019 10:47 AMÀ:  tagging@openstreetmap.orgRépondre à:  tagging@openstreetmap.orgObjet: Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards  Right. Silvopasture combines trees used for forestry with grass for grazing. That means that the trees are used to produce for forestry products: usually wood or timber, sometimes bark, sap, or other non-food products.Orchards produce food: usually fruits like bananas, coconuts or oranges, but also tea leaves, coffee beans, and fruits used for oil like olives and oil palms. (According to current osm usage)I think a new tag like secondary_landuse or landuse:secondary would be nice so we don’t needn’t tags for every common combination, but I’m ok with orchard=meadow_orchard since it is already in use.JosephOn Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 4:43 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 09:18 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com>:On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 00:33, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow orchards. A meadow orchard is specifically low density/sparse trees, while silvopasture indicates a forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover.Really?  I don't see anything in the Wikipedia article that specifies the tree cover is dense. I didn't write it was "dense", I wrote it was "denser", compared to a meadow orchard.  Infact, it says: "Integrating pasture into existing woodland presents challenges as well: 
the woodland likely needs to be thinned to increase light infiltration"  It also has pictures of several differentsilvopastures, none of which appear to have dense tree cover throughout. it is using the term "woodland". For meadow orchards, I would use the term "meadow" with trees on it. The term "silvo" also is about a "forest"/woods. Can you see the difference?  Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either pasture or cutting the grass, while silvopasture implies pasture.The trees scattered throughout would make it more economic to put animals out to pasture on it than to mow it.  But maybe where you are people do things the least efficient way.  Even ifthat is the case, I doubt that would remain viable for much longer.BTW, we're probably fooling ourselves in many cases where we say a field is pasture ormeadow: it may change from year to year.places in southern Germany used for pasture are often in environments where (mechanically) cutting the grass is not feasible, due to steep terrain, or where mowing does not make a lot of sense because the soil is quite magre.My point was that "silvopasture" has different connotations, it is about (some kind of) forest with animals grazing below, while meadow orchards is about meadows with sparse (fruit) trees on them (or sparse orchards on a meadow, if you like to put it the other way round). Silvopasture requires pasture, meadow orchards don't.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] Tagging meadow orchards

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 09:51, Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> we may have to byte the bullet and allow semicolon-separated values for
> landuse.
>

+1

Specific word combinations are not a good solution
>

+1

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 09:47, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> Right. Silvopasture combines trees used for forestry with grass for
> grazing.
>

>From the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture:

Silvopasture is compatible with fruit, nut, and timber production. Grazing
can serve as a cost-effective vegetation and weed control method.
Silvopasture can also help reduce pests and disease in orchards - when
introduced into an orchard after harvest, livestock are able to consume
unharvested fruits, preventing pests and diseases from spreading via these
unharvested fruits and in some cases consuming the pests themselves


That means that the trees are used to produce for forestry products:
> usually wood or timber, sometimes bark, sap, or other non-food products.
>

Or fruit.  Or nuts.  As per the Wikipedia article.

>
> Orchards produce food: usually fruits like bananas, coconuts or oranges,
> but also tea leaves, coffee beans, and fruits used for oil like olives and
> oil palms. (According to current osm usage)
>

See Wikipedia article, and above quotation from it.  Silvopasture includes
orchards and other food
trees.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 08:43, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 09:18 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen  >:
>
>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 00:33, Martin Koppenhoefer 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow orchards. A
>>> meadow orchard is specifically low density/sparse trees, while silvopasture
>>> indicates a forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover.
>>>
>>
>> Really?  I don't see anything in the Wikipedia article that specifies the
>> tree cover is dense.
>>
>
>
> I didn't write it was "dense", I wrote it was "denser", compared to a
> meadow orchard.
>

I see a range of tree densities in the Wikipedia article.

it is using the term "woodland". For meadow orchards, I would use the term
> "meadow" with trees on it. The term "silvo" also is about a "forest"/woods.
> Can you see the difference?
>

And the term "pasture" is about pastures.  Can you see the similarities?

Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either pasture or cutting
>> the grass, while silvopasture implies pasture.
>>
>
So you object to silvopasture on the grounds that it implies pasture but
want orchard_meadow
(which implies meadow) yet just admitted that the meadow in an orchard
meadow can be
used either as a meadow OR as a pasture.  If you were being consistent you
would insist on
silvomeadowpasture or propose orchard_pasture too.  I suspect that what is
really behind your
insistence is you want a literal, word-for-word translation of a German
term rather than the
English term for the same thing.

BTW, we're probably fooling ourselves in many cases where we say a field is
>> pasture or
>>
> meadow: it may change from year to year.
>>
>

places in southern Germany used for pasture are often in environments where
> (mechanically) cutting the grass is not feasible, due to steep terrain, or
> where mowing does not make a lot of sense because the soil is quite magre.
>

I said in many cases, not all cases.  We have hill farms around here where
mowing is not
feasible.  But where mowing is possible farmers move animals around fields
from year to
year so that the droppings provide nutrients and improve the physical
properties of the soil.
In some cases I would be confident that a field is pasture and will never
be used as a meadow
but less often would I be confident that field is pasture and will never be
used as a meadow.

My point was that "silvopasture" has different connotations, it is about
> (some kind of) forest with animals grazing below,
>

I don't see that connotation.  From the Wikipedia article: "Silvopasture
can be established by
planting trees into existing pasture 
[...]" and "Integrating pasture into existing woodland presents
challenges as well: the woodland likely needs to be thinned to increase
light infiltration,"

Neither of those quotes support that silvopasture is about turning animals
loose into a
forest.


> while meadow orchards is about meadows with sparse (fruit) trees on them
> (or sparse orchards on a meadow, if you like to put it the other way round).
>

Not only does the Wikipedia article state that you can put trees into
pasture but it shows pictures
of fields with sparse trees.

Silvopasture requires pasture, meadow orchards don't.
>

A wise man once told me "Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for
either pasture
or cutting the grass."  So meadow_orchard is as wrong as silvopasture.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Topographe Fou]

  And what about something like:Landuse=mixed (0 use in taginfo)Landuse:orchard=yesLanduse:meadow=yes   I would prefer that compared to secondary_landuse as it is much more scalable and less conflict-prone.  LeTopographeFou   De: joseph.eisenb...@gmail.comEnvoyé: 19 septembre 2019 10:47 AMÀ: tagging@openstreetmap.orgRépondre à: tagging@openstreetmap.orgObjet: Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards  Right. Silvopasture combines trees used for forestry with grass for grazing. That means that the trees are used to produce for forestry products: usually wood or timber, sometimes bark, sap, or other non-food products.Orchards produce food: usually fruits like bananas, coconuts or oranges, but also tea leaves, coffee beans, and fruits used for oil like olives and oil palms. (According to current osm usage)I think a new tag like secondary_landuse or landuse:secondary would be nice so we don’t needn’t tags for every common combination, but I’m ok with orchard=meadow_orchard since it is already in use.JosephOn Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 4:43 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 09:18 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com>:On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 00:33, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow orchards. A meadow orchard is specifically low density/sparse trees, while silvopasture indicates a forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover.Really?  I don't see anything in the Wikipedia article that specifies the tree cover is dense. I didn't write it was "dense", I wrote it was "denser", compared to a meadow orchard.  Infact, it says: "Integrating pasture into existing woodland presents challenges as well: 
the woodland likely needs to be thinned to increase light infiltration"  It also has pictures of several differentsilvopastures, none of which appear to have dense tree cover throughout. it is using the term "woodland". For meadow orchards, I would use the term "meadow" with trees on it. The term "silvo" also is about a "forest"/woods. Can you see the difference?  Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either pasture or cutting the grass, while silvopasture implies pasture.The trees scattered throughout would make it more economic to put animals out to pasture on it than to mow it.  But maybe where you are people do things the least efficient way.  Even ifthat is the case, I doubt that would remain viable for much longer.BTW, we're probably fooling ourselves in many cases where we say a field is pasture ormeadow: it may change from year to year.places in southern Germany used for pasture are often in environments where (mechanically) cutting the grass is not feasible, due to steep terrain, or where mowing does not make a lot of sense because the soil is quite magre.My point was that "silvopasture" has different connotations, it is about (some kind of) forest with animals grazing below, while meadow orchards is about meadows with sparse (fruit) trees on them (or sparse orchards on a meadow, if you like to put it the other way round). Silvopasture requires pasture, meadow orchards don't.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] Tagging meadow orchards

[Volker Schmidt]

 we may have to byte the bullet and allow semicolon-separated values for
landuse. Specific word combinations are not a good solution
So far I know of
meadow + fruit trees
bovine pasture + aok trees
grain + olive trees
grain + Almond
pigs + trees

I am sure there are many more.



Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#m_-2205893141216746646_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 09:43, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 09:18 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen  >:
>
>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 00:33, Martin Koppenhoefer 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow orchards. A
>>> meadow orchard is specifically low density/sparse trees, while silvopasture
>>> indicates a forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover.
>>>
>>
>> Really?  I don't see anything in the Wikipedia article that specifies the
>> tree cover is dense.
>>
>
>
> I didn't write it was "dense", I wrote it was "denser", compared to a
> meadow orchard.
>
>
>
>> In
>> fact, it says: "Integrating pasture into existing woodland presents
>> challenges as well: the woodland
>> likely needs to be thinned to increase light infiltration"  It also has
>> pictures of several different
>> silvopastures, none of which appear to have dense tree cover throughout.
>>
>
>
> it is using the term "woodland". For meadow orchards, I would use the term
> "meadow" with trees on it. The term "silvo" also is about a "forest"/woods.
> Can you see the difference?
>
>
>
>
>> Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either pasture or
>>> cutting the grass, while silvopasture implies pasture.
>>>
>>
>> The trees scattered throughout would make it more economic to put animals
>> out to pasture on
>> it than to mow it.  But maybe where you are people do things the least
>> efficient way.  Even if
>> that is the case, I doubt that would remain viable for much longer.
>>
>> BTW, we're probably fooling ourselves in many cases where we say a field
>> is pasture or
>> meadow: it may change from year to year.
>>
>
>
> places in southern Germany used for pasture are often in environments
> where (mechanically) cutting the grass is not feasible, due to steep
> terrain, or where mowing does not make a lot of sense because the soil is
> quite magre.
> My point was that "silvopasture" has different connotations, it is about
> (some kind of) forest with animals grazing below, while meadow orchards is
> about meadows with sparse (fruit) trees on them (or sparse orchards on a
> meadow, if you like to put it the other way round). Silvopasture requires
> pasture, meadow orchards don't.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Right. Silvopasture combines trees used for forestry with grass for
grazing.

That means that the trees are used to produce for forestry products:
usually wood or timber, sometimes bark, sap, or other non-food products.

Orchards produce food: usually fruits like bananas, coconuts or oranges,
but also tea leaves, coffee beans, and fruits used for oil like olives and
oil palms. (According to current osm usage)

I think a new tag like secondary_landuse or landuse:secondary would be nice
so we don’t needn’t tags for every common combination, but I’m ok with
orchard=meadow_orchard since it is already in use.

Joseph

On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 4:43 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 09:18 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen  >:
>
>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 00:33, Martin Koppenhoefer 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow orchards. A
>>> meadow orchard is specifically low density/sparse trees, while silvopasture
>>> indicates a forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover.
>>>
>>
>> Really?  I don't see anything in the Wikipedia article that specifies the
>> tree cover is dense.
>>
>
>
> I didn't write it was "dense", I wrote it was "denser", compared to a
> meadow orchard.
>
>
>
>> In
>> fact, it says: "Integrating pasture into existing woodland presents
>> challenges as well: the woodland
>> likely needs to be thinned to increase light infiltration"  It also has
>> pictures of several different
>> silvopastures, none of which appear to have dense tree cover throughout.
>>
>
>
> it is using the term "woodland". For meadow orchards, I would use the term
> "meadow" with trees on it. The term "silvo" also is about a "forest"/woods.
> Can you see the difference?
>
>
>
>
>> Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either pasture or
>>> cutting the grass, while silvopasture implies pasture.
>>>
>>
>> The trees scattered throughout would make it more economic to put animals
>> out to pasture on
>> it than to mow it.  But maybe where you are people do things the least
>> efficient way.  Even if
>> that is the case, I doubt that would remain viable for much longer.
>>
>> BTW, we're probably fooling ourselves in many cases where we say a field
>> is pasture or
>> meadow: it may change from year to year.
>>
>
>
> places in southern Germany used for pasture are often in environments
> where (mechanically) cutting the grass is not feasible, due to steep
> terrain, or where mowing does not make a lot of sense because the soil is
> quite magre.
> My point was that "silvopasture" has different connotations, it is about
> (some kind of) forest with animals grazing below, while meadow orchards is
> about meadows with sparse (fruit) trees on them (or sparse orchards on a
> meadow, if you like to put it the other way round). Silvopasture requires
> pasture, meadow orchards don't.
>
> 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] Tagging meadow orchards

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 09:18 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :

> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 00:33, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
>
> I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow orchards. A
>> meadow orchard is specifically low density/sparse trees, while silvopasture
>> indicates a forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover.
>>
>
> Really?  I don't see anything in the Wikipedia article that specifies the
> tree cover is dense.
>


I didn't write it was "dense", I wrote it was "denser", compared to a
meadow orchard.



> In
> fact, it says: "Integrating pasture into existing woodland presents
> challenges as well: the woodland
> likely needs to be thinned to increase light infiltration"  It also has
> pictures of several different
> silvopastures, none of which appear to have dense tree cover throughout.
>


it is using the term "woodland". For meadow orchards, I would use the term
"meadow" with trees on it. The term "silvo" also is about a "forest"/woods.
Can you see the difference?




> Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either pasture or
>> cutting the grass, while silvopasture implies pasture.
>>
>
> The trees scattered throughout would make it more economic to put animals
> out to pasture on
> it than to mow it.  But maybe where you are people do things the least
> efficient way.  Even if
> that is the case, I doubt that would remain viable for much longer.
>
> BTW, we're probably fooling ourselves in many cases where we say a field
> is pasture or
> meadow: it may change from year to year.
>


places in southern Germany used for pasture are often in environments where
(mechanically) cutting the grass is not feasible, due to steep terrain, or
where mowing does not make a lot of sense because the soil is quite magre.
My point was that "silvopasture" has different connotations, it is about
(some kind of) forest with animals grazing below, while meadow orchards is
about meadows with sparse (fruit) trees on them (or sparse orchards on a
meadow, if you like to put it the other way round). Silvopasture requires
pasture, meadow orchards don't.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 00:33, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow orchards. A
> meadow orchard is specifically low density/sparse trees, while silvopasture
> indicates a forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover.
>

Really?  I don't see anything in the Wikipedia article that specifies the
tree cover is dense.  In
fact, it says: "Integrating pasture into existing woodland presents
challenges as well: the woodland
likely needs to be thinned to increase light infiltration"  It also has
pictures of several different
silvopastures, none of which appear to have dense tree cover throughout.

Also the meadow in meadow orchard can be used for either pasture or cutting
> the grass, while silvopasture implies pasture.
>

The trees scattered throughout would make it more economic to put animals
out to pasture on
it than to mow it.  But maybe where you are people do things the least
efficient way.  Even if
that is the case, I doubt that would remain viable for much longer.

BTW, we're probably fooling ourselves in many cases where we say a field is
pasture or
meadow: it may change from year to year.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

On 18. Sep 2019, at 20:46, Paul Allen  wrote:

>> AFAIK, silvopasture describes a forest that is also used for grazing 
>> livestock.
> 
> From the wikipedia article on silvopasture: "Silvopasture is compatible with 
> fruit, nut,
> and timber production."



I agree the term silvopasture is not a synonym for meadow orchards. A meadow 
orchard is specifically low density/sparse trees, while silvopasture indicates 
a forest/woodland, i.e. denser tree cover. Also the meadow in meadow orchard 
can be used for either pasture or cutting the grass, while silvopasture implies 
pasture.


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 18. Sep 2019, at 20:05, Markus  wrote:
> 
> I dislike both landuse=meadow + meadow=meadow_orchard and
> landuse=orchard + orchard=meadow_orchard because they imply a primary
> usage (meadow or orchard respectively), which i think is impossible to
> determine. Therefore i prefer landuse=meadow_orchard.


I don’t object to meadow_orchard, but IMHO you can see meadow orchards as kind 
of extensive orchard, i.e. the primary (dominating / characterizing) use is 
growing of fruits and the meadow is secondary (could be further divided into 
pasture and “grassfield”).

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 19:32, Markus  wrote:

>
> AFAIK, silvopasture describes a forest that is also used for grazing
> livestock.
>

>From the wikipedia article on silvopasture: "Silvopasture is compatible
with fruit, nut,
and timber production."

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Markus]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 20:11, Paul Allen  wrote:
>
> Or landuse=silvopasture.

AFAIK, silvopasture describes a forest that is also used for grazing livestock.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 19:07, Markus  wrote:

>
> I dislike both landuse=meadow + meadow=meadow_orchard and
> landuse=orchard + orchard=meadow_orchard because they imply a primary
> usage (meadow or orchard respectively), which i think is impossible to
> determine. Therefore i prefer landuse=meadow_orchard.
>

Or landuse=silvopasture.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Markus]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 19:10, Jan Michel  wrote:
>
> Current usage stats:
>
> landuse=meadow_orchard  47
> landuse=meadow + meadow=meadow_orchard  650
> landuse=orchard + orchard=meadow_orchard 2700

I dislike both landuse=meadow + meadow=meadow_orchard and
landuse=orchard + orchard=meadow_orchard because they imply a primary
usage (meadow or orchard respectively), which i think is impossible to
determine. Therefore i prefer landuse=meadow_orchard.

Regards

Markus

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Jan Michel]

Hi Tobias,

All the options are listed here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dmeadow_orchard

Current usage stats:

landuse=meadow_orchard  47
landuse=meadow + meadow=meadow_orchard  650
landuse=orchard + orchard=meadow_orchard 2700


Jan


On 18.09.19 16:46, Tobias Zwick wrote:

Hey there

What is the best way to tag meadow orchards?



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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Mateusz Konieczny]

18 Sep 2019, 16:46 by o...@westnordost.de:
> b) a subtag of landuse=orchard? Maybe orchard=meadow/plantation?
>
orchard=meadow_orchard

(A bit of duplication but clear,
just orchard=meadow looks
like a mistake)

Or orchard=mixed_with_meadow?___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mi., 18. Sept. 2019 um 16:48 Uhr schrieb Tobias Zwick :

> Hey there
>
> What is the best way to tag meadow orchards?
>
>

this has been discussed 10 years ago, but I don't recall the results (if
any). I think by the time it was to not introduce a new landuse value like
meadow_orchard




> Most orchards are plantations with monocultures of one kind of tree,
> usually planted in rows and pruned to have a short trunk for easier picking.
> There is another type of orchard, in German "Streuobstwiese", in English I
> think "meadow orchard" or "meadow with fruit trees". This orchard has many
> different types of fruit trees scattered all over the meadow. The trees are
> usually not pruned. The meadow serves multiple purposes: As a meadow and as
> an orchard.
>


I would keep the question of pruning out of this discussion, it may vary
and is not essential, or is it?



> Show the meadow orchard be
>
> a) an own tag, like landuse=meadow_orchard?
>
b) a subtag of landuse=orchard? Maybe orchard=meadow/plantation?
>
>

if it should be a subtype of orchard (or meadow), it could be an
"meadow_orchard" there (i.e. orchard=meadow_orchard)



> c) or should the "meadow orchard" be a landuse=meadow with every single
> fruit tree added separately? (Well, I suppose it could in any case, but
> that's quite a micromapping solution)
>
>

while this would be possible, it wouldn't harm to have a more abstract
representation (i.e. an additional qualifier for the landuse area) ready to
use, regardless of the individual trees being mapped or not.

There's another possibility to make this more generic: secondary_landuse=*
e.g.
landuse=orchard
secondary_landuse=meadow

We've discussed this recently because of an example of a "farmland forest".
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-August/047801.html

Although this would still pose the question which is primary and which is
secondary, in some cases.

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

[Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

[Tobias Zwick]

Hey there

What is the best way to tag meadow orchards?

Most orchards are plantations with monocultures of one kind of tree, usually 
planted in rows and pruned to have a short trunk for easier picking.

There is another type of orchard, in German "Streuobstwiese", in English I 
think "meadow orchard" or "meadow with fruit trees". This orchard has many 
different types of fruit trees scattered all over the meadow. The trees are 
usually not pruned. The meadow serves multiple purposes: As a meadow and as an 
orchard.
(Nowadays) meadow orchards are less common, because they are less accessible to 
machines for hay harvest and less convenient to harvest the fruit.

Show the meadow orchard be 

a) an own tag, like landuse=meadow_orchard?

b) a subtag of landuse=orchard? Maybe orchard=meadow/plantation?

c) or should the "meadow orchard" be a landuse=meadow with every single fruit 
tree added separately? (Well, I suppose it could in any case, but that's quite 
a micromapping solution)

What do you think?

Tobias

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