Re: [OSM-talk-be] trees (in a row) vs. tree_row

2017-02-03 Thread Marc Gemis 
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 8:47 AM, joost schouppe  wrote:
> f you're looking for a wider range of opinions, do ask the same question in
> the tagging mailing list. I've come to kind of enjoy the merry-go-round
> discussions there, so I'm willing to ask for you and report here :)

Or ask it on help.openstreetmap.org

m

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] trees (in a row) vs. tree_row

2017-02-02 Thread joost schouppe 
In the case you showed on Mapillary, I think I would leave a gap in between
two rows.

In general, I think the reason for using tree_row is just a matter of
mapping speed and what you can see: on an aerial picture, you can easily
make out a tree row, but it is harder to pin-point the exact location of
the trees. There's also the argument that we tend to only map individual
trees if they are "significant". Of course what makes a tree significant is
up to mapper discretion.

If you're looking for a wider range of opinions, do ask the same question
in the tagging mailing list. I've come to kind of enjoy the merry-go-round
discussions there, so I'm willing to ask for you and report here :)

2017-02-02 12:08 GMT+01:00 Karel Adams :

> Not hindered by any expertise or authority, I feel tempted to reply: if,
> in full foliage, they cast one continuous shadow, then it is a row; if not,
> they are separate trees.
>
> KA
>
> On 02/02/17 10:42, Pieter Brusselman wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> When do you decide that trees are closed enough into a line to map them as
> a tree_row or just map them as individual trees?
>
> for example: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.07764176804454=3.
> 5352408793126244=17=photo=EmDXwpiZawxLmLwO574imw
>
>
> Grtz,
> Pieter
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing 
> listTalk-be@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>


-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] trees (in a row) vs. tree_row

2017-02-02 Thread Karel Adams 
Not hindered by any expertise or authority, I feel tempted to reply: if, 
in full foliage, they cast one continuous shadow, then it is a row; if 
not, they are separate trees.


KA


On 02/02/17 10:42, Pieter Brusselman wrote:


Hi,

When do you decide that trees are closed enough into a line to map 
them as a tree_row or just map them as individual trees?


for example: 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.07764176804454=3.5352408793126244=17=photo=EmDXwpiZawxLmLwO574imw



Grtz,
Pieter



___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be