landcover=mud? Can you explain where this is expected to be a permanent
condition? Maybe wasteland with soil pollution that prevents things from
growing?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Hello all,
We have completely rewritten the proposal based on all the feedback we
received. It should be much clearer now what we want and especially, why we
think this change is a good idea. This rewrite should clarify a lot of the
things.
We would like to receive feedback.
For reference,
Feb 21, 2023, 12:30 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
>
>
> On 19/2/23 06:00, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Feb 17, 2023, 11:03 by >> 61sundow...@gmail.com>> :
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 16/2/23 21:11, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>>>
Feb 16,
On 19/2/23 06:00, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
Feb 17, 2023, 11:03 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
On 16/2/23 21:11, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
Feb 16, 2023, 10:18 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
landuse=meadow should delete the vegetation in the
Hi,
Le jeu. 16 févr. 2023 à 14:36, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> a écrit :
>
> Have you compared increase in activity with change in OSM activity in
> general
> or other unrelated object types where no such changes happened?
> For example other power network tagging
Feb 17, 2023, 11:03 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
>
>
> On 16/2/23 21:11, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Feb 16, 2023, 10:18 by >> 61sundow...@gmail.com>> :
>>
>>>
>>> landuse=meadow should delete the vegetation in the description
>>> leaving the use ... "Used
On 16/2/23 21:11, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
Feb 16, 2023, 10:18 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
landuse=meadow should delete the vegetation in the description
leaving the use ... "Used to tag an area of land used for hay
(meadow) or for grazing animals (pasture)." That
In your examples you are mixing functional and physical tags.
At first, we actually deprecate landuse=grass so that is -1 tag for grass.
"Even if you succeed in replacing over 5 million uses of landuse=grass with
landcover=grass there will still be areas of landuse=meadow and
natural=grassland
Feb 13, 2023, 20:14 by fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
> Hi,
>
> Le lun. 13 févr. 2023 à 14:11, Andy Townsend <> ajt1...@gmail.com> > a écrit :
>
>>
>> > By the way, I saw some changes leading to x10 contribution rates and
>> > be criticized as disrupting longstanding practices or
Feb 16, 2023, 10:18 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
> landuse=meadow should delete the vegetation in the description leaving
> the use ... "Used to tag an area of land used for hay (meadow) or for
> grazing animals (pasture)." That would make it clear and possibly reduce
> its
On 16/2/23 14:56, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Problem: there are 3+ tags for areas of mostly grass with sometimes
overlapping meaning, in 2 different keys (landuse=meadow,
natural=grassland, landuse=grass)
You have forgotten at least one - landuse=farmland, crop=grass.
However while
Problem: there are 3+ tags for areas of mostly grass with sometimes
overlapping meaning, in 2 different keys (landuse=meadow,
natural=grassland, landuse=grass)
Solution(?): 4+ tags for areas of grass with overlapping meaning, in 3
different keys
I don’t see how this will be an improvement.
Even
We have significantly updated the proposal. We have removed most of the
proposed values and only trees and grass are left. This to reduce the scope of
the proposal.
We also tried to better explain that with this proposal, we aim to improve the
tagging scheme in the long term. This proposal is
I was about to list some points by which I think this proposal has great
advantages, but I'll stick to these three, where Vincent sums it up much
more elegantly than I could have written.
As it happened before and it's still happening with other schemes, we
should always try to improve the
>
> Anyone suggesting widespread changes such as this needs to explain how
> this proposal will help with at least one of the following:
>
> 1) Allowing new mappers to contribute to OSM easier than they
> currently can
> 2) Allowing some nuance to be captured that can't be
Hi,
Le lun. 13 févr. 2023 à 14:11, Andy Townsend a écrit :
> > By the way, I saw some changes leading to x10 contribution rates and be
> criticized as disrupting longstanding practices or established tagging.
>
> An actual example would be really useful here.
>
Here are some, very specific
> By the way, I saw some changes leading to x10 contribution rates and
be criticized as disrupting longstanding practices or established tagging.
An actual example would be really useful here.
> Establishment nor longstanding practices shouldn't be valid reasons
on their own to justify
Hello
Le ven. 10 févr. 2023 à 19:29, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> a écrit :
> Or to be more specific solved problems, if any, are much smaller than size
> of change of longstanding tagging practices.
>
To me, it's a return of experience matter and a debate we
Or to be more specific solved problems, if any, are much smaller than size
of change of longstanding tagging practices.
Deprecation of old-style multipolygons was also change of
"longstanding tagging practices" but much smaller in scope and with much
greater benefits.
I listed some obvious
This is a change to longstanding tagging practices and is therefore dead on
arrival.
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 11:33 AM Cartographer10 via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Tjuro and I started a proposal to formalize the usage of `landcover=*`.
> The proposal is now open for feedback
>
Tjuro and I started a proposal to formalize the usage of `landcover=*`. The
proposal is now open for feedback
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover_proposal_V2
Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
Kind regards,
21 matches
Mail list logo
