Trust me on this but I don't think these particular ones are. It's in one
of the more built up areas and some trees have been mapped but less than a
fifth of the trees in the tile have been mapped and the ones that have been
seem fairly random.
Looking at the other items mapped I suspect they pre
One reason is if the tree is a significant landmark.
Tom Taylor
On 12/11/2014 7:27 PM, john whelan wrote:
I'm happy and content and they are much easier to map than buildings but I
just wondered if there was any logic behind it other than they had grown
tired of mapping buildings.
Thanks John
I'm happy and content and they are much easier to map than buildings but I
just wondered if there was any logic behind it other than they had grown
tired of mapping buildings.
Thanks John
On 12 November 2014 19:14, Blake Girardot wrote:
> I don't think you missed anything in the Project instruc
I don't think you missed anything in the Project instructions for
individual trees. But with the missing maps project, OSMGeoWeek and other
assorted welcome to mapping type events it just be someone who thought it
would be fun to map in a few trees. I saw a couple of those recently when
doing some
I know they're nice but why would anyone spend time mapping trees rather
than buildings in a HOT area? Or did I miss something in the tasks?
Thanks
Cheerio John
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
