Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders
2014-07-14 23:10 GMT+02:00 Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com: 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
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 dieterdre...@gmail.com: 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
Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders
Wouldn't adding attributes solve the problem you described? I.e. field border=* On Jul 14, 2014 2:11 PM, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com 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 dieterdre...@gmail.com: 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
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 dieterdre...@gmail.com: 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
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
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 dieterdre...@gmail.com: 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
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
Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders
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 lowfligh...@googlemail.com: 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 m...@simon-wuellhorst.de 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 http://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
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
Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders
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 m...@simon-wuellhorst.de 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 http://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
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 simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst m...@simon-wuellhorst.de: 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
2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst m...@simon-wuellhorst.de: 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
Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders
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 simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst m...@simon-wuellhorst.de: 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
