Re: [Tagging] How to tag flood prone points and areas?

[Warin]

On 1/9/19 10:30 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:



On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 20:51, Paul Allen > wrote:


Verifiability is a problem.


Near here, there's one office building built lake-side, that has a car 
park as the ground level of the building. The car park has a line 
painted round it, about half way up the wall (1.2 - 1.5 m's) labelled 
as the 1-100 year flood level.


Another river side shopping centre has signs down the river end of the 
car park, warning that that part of the park floods during heavy rain.


The first one is only a potential, so you wouldn't map that as flood 
prone, but you would the second, but how?


You could add flood_prone=yes to the car park tag but that will show 
the whole car park as affected, whereas it's only the bit down this 
end that has a problem. Would drawing a separate area & marking that 
as flood_prone=yes work?




I asked this question some time ago. I was told it was not verifiable 
and therefore not for OSM.



My opinion remains - it can be mapped.


However there is the question of frequency, once in 10 year event, once 
in 100 etc. So I would add a sub tag or value about frequency of the 
event.. The key frequency is already in use. Period has some use too, 
though the use looks to be years.. no wiki to say what it is?


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

Re: [Tagging] What sport=* for automobile racing?

[Warin]

On 31/8/19 9:49 am, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

With highway=raceway, the most common tags are sport=motor,
sport=motocross and sport=karting (and even some sport=rc_car for
remote controlled model cars). These are specific types of motorsport,
except for "sport=motor", which can include automobiles, motorcycles
and go-karts, so it's not very specific.


Reason: Some tracks accept racing from all different kinds of motor vehicles 
e.g. trucks, cars and motorcycles.


There's also some uses of
sport=speedway which is also unclear.


Speedway is a oval dirt course that is usually used by cars and motorcycles.



There isn't really a common tag for raceways used specifically for
automobile racing (e.g. NASCAR, Formula One, Drag racing, Rallying,
etc).

There are 5 uses of sport=autocross, 2 of sport=auto, 1 of sport="auto
racing" (with a space).

It would be useful to have a specific tag since automobile racing,
motocross and karting use rather different raceways in most cases.


Most circuits want more money. So they do try to accept any kind of event.

For example

Assen was built for motorcycle racing (sealed), however to also has had car and 
kart racing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TT_Circuit_Assen

Brans Hatch .. originally a grass circuit for motorcycles now 2 sealed circuits 
used by trucks, cars and motorcycles. Also has an unsealed circuit too.. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brands_Hatch



Perhaps sport=auto_racing would be clear, and generic enough to cover
most types? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto_racing


Auto could be taken as car only, not trucks or motorcycles.
I note the motorcycles are mentioned on 6that Wikipedia page twice - once for 
riders how have taken up car racing and the second time for 'see also'.



Also, it looks like there are some other types of motorcycle racing,
other than motocross (which is specifically on dirt tracks /
raceways).

Would sport=motorcycle be good for these? It's used 7 times.\


One of these is a motocross track.
Another might be a club house, not a circuit and they are into off roading.

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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag flood prone points and areas?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 20:51, Paul Allen  wrote:

> Verifiability is a problem.
>

Near here, there's one office building built lake-side, that has a car park
as the ground level of the building. The car park has a line painted round
it, about half way up the wall (1.2 - 1.5 m's) labelled as the 1-100 year
flood level.

Another river side shopping centre has signs down the river end of the car
park, warning that that part of the park floods during heavy rain.

The first one is only a potential, so you wouldn't map that as flood prone,
but you would the second, but how?

You could add flood_prone=yes to the car park tag but that will show the
whole car park as affected, whereas it's only the bit down this end that
has a problem. Would drawing a separate area & marking that as
flood_prone=yes work?

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 22:46, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
> I would not renounce from having dehesa somewhere in the value, if this is
> an „English“ term and exactly what you want to tag.
>

It's not a term this Englishman has heard of.  But there are a lot of
specialist terms I've
learned since I started mapping.  So I did some googling.  It doesn't
appear to be a
term in English.  It seems to be something found in southern and central
Spain,
and also southern Portugal (where it's called a montado).  See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehesa

The Wikipedia article suggests a possibility for a landuse tag:
landuse=agrosylvopastoral.
A bit of a mouthful, but perhaps gets around the objection to calling it
agroforestry.  An
alternative found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture would be
landuse=sylvopasture.
Disadvantage of either of those is they may not be intuitively obvious.
Advantage is we
don't have to come up with subtags to define it.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

many years ago we were discussing meadow_orchard actually. I agree with 
Christoph that there is room for a secondary landuse tag like landuse:secondary 

it could otherwise be a subtag for forests, like
landuse=forest
forest=dehesa
or forest=agroforestry
agroforestry=dehesa

I would not renounce from having dehesa somewhere in the value, if this is an 
„English“ term and exactly what you want to tag.

Cheers Martin 



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

Re: [Tagging] waterway=artificial documentation

[François Lacombe]

Hi Paul

Indeed I didn't think about an import, thank you to remind me this

Le ven. 30 août 2019 à 20:49, Paul Allen  a écrit :

>
> I'll leave it to you to figure out the best way of dealing with it,
> although I suspect translating
> that particular Ftype to waterway=ArtificialPath was an error (possibly a
> bulk error from
> a bulk import) and it should have been waterway=river, along with a note
> saying it's
> an NHD artificial path or a source tag saying it came from an NHD
> artificial path, or something.
>

I'll directly ask to US community about this

All the best

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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag flood prone points and areas?

[Alessandro Sarretta]

Dear Immaculata,

if you want to describe "things" that are prone to floods, it seems to 
me that the tag /flood_prone=yes/ can be the right one.


I have a few doubts on how this information has been collected: are 
there official maps with areas prone to flood and you have selected 
assets in that area or you interviewed people who told you that some 
specific assets were impacted by floods in the past?


If the second is true, verifiability and return times are important 
issues that have to be tackled and somehow mapped.


Ale

On 31/08/19 05:21, Immaculate Mwanja wrote:

Hi there!

In the summer of 2018, we conducted a project called Assets and 
Threats mapping 
under 
the Ramani Huria project in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania that aims to make 
Dar es Salaam a more flood-resilient city. In this project, we focused 
on the assets/amenities in the city that are important to the 
community and are at risk of flooding or not.


After collecting all the information, we decided we should upload them 
in OSM to be shared with the world since it was a successful project 
to some extent. The challenge came when we could not upload these data 
since there is no specific tag to use for amenities or AoIs affected 
by floods, the only tag that we could find is flood_prone=yes 
but this is 
mostly applicable to “roads/ways" that go underwater after heavy rains.


 1. Is there any other tag that can be used for points under flooding
threat or can we use another tag?
 2. Our initial thought was to create a new tag i.e. asset:risk=yes
and asset:risk=noor we could overcome this challenge by having one
tag that is used by the entire OSM community to identify ways,
areas, or pointsthat are prone to floods

Kind regards,
*Immaculata Mwanja*

___
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] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Re: "As for establishing two different landuse tags for the same
territory, it could be fine for me, but I don't know if that would
create rendering problems"

It's not so much of a problem; renders could choose to just show the
primary feature, or they could choose to interpret both tags. Since
the primary features are already established tags, most renders will
still show something (though only renders who interpret the secondary
feature will get it perfect)

The alternative, of having different tags for each combination, might
actually be a little more complicated. You would need a
meadow+forestry tag like dehesa or agroforestry, but also a
meadow+orchard tag (landuse=meadow_orchard?), a cropland+forestry tag,
cropland+orchard, orchard + forestry (e.g. shade-grown coffee), etc.,
and renders + other database users would have to look for each of
these new feature tags.

Also, when I hear "agroforestry" my first thought is "tree
plantation?" and second would be "christmas tree farm?" - I don't
immediately think "forestry mixed with agriculture", while I can
pretty quickly figure out that landuse=meadow +
landuse:secondary=forest is land that's used both for pasture and for
wood.

So I like the landuse:secondary=* and natural:secondary=* tags best.

(But if that's too complicated, feel free to use what works best for
your local community. Not every tag has to account for all
possibilities.)

- Joseph

On 8/31/19, Diego Cruz  wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> A dehesa is not just a type of farmland, because the surface is covered by
> trees that are regularly pruned and used for wood, so it is a mixed usage
> of farmland and forestry (and pasture).
>
> Best regards
> Diego
>
> El sáb., 31 ago. 2019 a las 12:47, Peter Elderson ()
> escribió:
>
>> It appears to be a specific type of farmland, so landuse=farmland +
>> farmland=dehesa would say it all and disrupt nothing.
>>
>> Mvg Peter Elderson
>>
>> Op 31 aug. 2019 om 12:25 heeft Diego Cruz  het
>> volgende geschreven:
>>
>> Hi Cristoph,
>>
>> Thank you for your feedback, it's really appreciated. You are completely
>> right when you say that dehesa might exclude similar environments in
>> other
>> parts of the world, and that is of course not my intention. I just used
>> the
>> word dehesa because it appears as such in Wikipedia. Among your three
>> proposals, I would go with landuse=agroforestry, because it would be a
>> way
>> of reflecting this mixed usage of land without being too local. As for
>> establishing two different landuse tags for the same territory, it could
>> be
>> fine for me, but I don't know if that would create rendering problems (as
>> I
>> mentioned, I'm new to this). I don't think this should be resolved with
>> secondary tags, because a dehesa is an entity in itself and the uses of
>> the
>> land are not subordinated to each other.
>>
>> I will wait for more replies before modifying my proposal.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Diego
>>
>> El vie., 30 ago. 2019 a las 12:00, Christoph Hormann ()
>> escribió:
>>
>>> On Friday 30 August 2019, Diego Cruz wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I have recently proposed a new tag in the Wiki, because none of the
>>> > existing landuse tags seem to match it. A dehesa is a type of land
>>> > that combines a forest with either fields or pasturelands (or both)
>>> > at the same time. It is extensively used in the Iberian Peninsula,
>>> > both in Spain and Portugal. Please see the details in my proposal
>>> > below:
>>> >
>>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dehesa
>>>
>>> This is certainly a valid idea for inventing a new tag and it is good
>>> that you open up discussion early.  Let me take this as an example for
>>> two things that have in the past been decisive on the broader success
>>> of tags:
>>>
>>> * local verifiability.  The primary definition of your tag is for areas
>>> in a certain region that are in the cultural tradition of that region
>>> called a certain way.  You try to list a few verifiable criteria what
>>> not to use the tag for - but these are one sided criteria.  Because
>>> natural=wood does not rule out use as pasture (and neither does
>>> landuse=orchard, which is also used for cork oak plantations),
>>> landuse=farmland does not rule out the presence of trees or the use as
>>> pasture and many savannas (for which we have no specific tag at the
>>> moment) are created by human influence.  A good tag is one where a
>>> local observer, even a casual one like a traveler quickly coming
>>> through, can without much difficulty determine locally if the tag
>>> applies or not.
>>>
>>> * generic meaning.  As already mentioned you draft this as a region
>>> specific tag although agroforestry is a practice that exists in many
>>> different parts of the world in different forms.  Such tag will either
>>> stay a local speciality tag without much chance for being interpreted
>>> by global data users and possibly mirrored by other region specific
>>> tags with similar but slightly different meaning or 

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Diego Cruz]

Hi Peter,

A dehesa is not just a type of farmland, because the surface is covered by
trees that are regularly pruned and used for wood, so it is a mixed usage
of farmland and forestry (and pasture).

Best regards
Diego

El sáb., 31 ago. 2019 a las 12:47, Peter Elderson ()
escribió:

> It appears to be a specific type of farmland, so landuse=farmland +
> farmland=dehesa would say it all and disrupt nothing.
>
> Mvg Peter Elderson
>
> Op 31 aug. 2019 om 12:25 heeft Diego Cruz  het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> Hi Cristoph,
>
> Thank you for your feedback, it's really appreciated. You are completely
> right when you say that dehesa might exclude similar environments in other
> parts of the world, and that is of course not my intention. I just used the
> word dehesa because it appears as such in Wikipedia. Among your three
> proposals, I would go with landuse=agroforestry, because it would be a way
> of reflecting this mixed usage of land without being too local. As for
> establishing two different landuse tags for the same territory, it could be
> fine for me, but I don't know if that would create rendering problems (as I
> mentioned, I'm new to this). I don't think this should be resolved with
> secondary tags, because a dehesa is an entity in itself and the uses of the
> land are not subordinated to each other.
>
> I will wait for more replies before modifying my proposal.
>
> Best regards
> Diego
>
> El vie., 30 ago. 2019 a las 12:00, Christoph Hormann ()
> escribió:
>
>> On Friday 30 August 2019, Diego Cruz wrote:
>> >
>> > I have recently proposed a new tag in the Wiki, because none of the
>> > existing landuse tags seem to match it. A dehesa is a type of land
>> > that combines a forest with either fields or pasturelands (or both)
>> > at the same time. It is extensively used in the Iberian Peninsula,
>> > both in Spain and Portugal. Please see the details in my proposal
>> > below:
>> >
>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dehesa
>>
>> This is certainly a valid idea for inventing a new tag and it is good
>> that you open up discussion early.  Let me take this as an example for
>> two things that have in the past been decisive on the broader success
>> of tags:
>>
>> * local verifiability.  The primary definition of your tag is for areas
>> in a certain region that are in the cultural tradition of that region
>> called a certain way.  You try to list a few verifiable criteria what
>> not to use the tag for - but these are one sided criteria.  Because
>> natural=wood does not rule out use as pasture (and neither does
>> landuse=orchard, which is also used for cork oak plantations),
>> landuse=farmland does not rule out the presence of trees or the use as
>> pasture and many savannas (for which we have no specific tag at the
>> moment) are created by human influence.  A good tag is one where a
>> local observer, even a casual one like a traveler quickly coming
>> through, can without much difficulty determine locally if the tag
>> applies or not.
>>
>> * generic meaning.  As already mentioned you draft this as a region
>> specific tag although agroforestry is a practice that exists in many
>> different parts of the world in different forms.  Such tag will either
>> stay a local speciality tag without much chance for being interpreted
>> by global data users and possibly mirrored by other region specific
>> tags with similar but slightly different meaning or it will morph into
>> a broad umbrella tag - for example for any kind of 'area with trees
>> that does not really qualify as wood/forest'.  Well known examples for
>> such tags are natural=fell and landuse=village_green.
>>
>> There are three potential tagging concepts i could imagine could be
>> derived from your idea that would seem more promising in that regard:
>>
>> * a tag for agroforestry landuse.  This of course would only be locally
>> verifiable if there is active agricultural use.  That would only
>> qualify those dehesas that are actively used for agriculture as such.
>> And it would say very little about the physical appearance and
>> ecological characteristics of an area.
>>
>> * establishing a generic tagging concept for secondary characteristics
>> of areas - like use of orchards as pasture, underbrush in a forest or
>> scattered trees on a meadow.  This could be quite easily implemented
>> using natural:secondary=*, landuse:secondary=* etc.  Dehesas would
>> under such scheme be something like
>>
>> - landuse=farmland + landuse:secondary=orchard
>> - landuse=meadow + landuse:secondary=orchard
>> - landuse=orchard + landuse:secondary=meadow
>>
>> * creating one or more region specific secondary tags for exising
>> primary tags like landuse=farmland or landuse=orchard for documenting
>> the region specific ecological characteristics of the area.
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://l

Re: [Tagging] How to tag flood prone points and areas?

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 08:30, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

>
> But it's also questionable if entering 10 year or 100 year flood zones
> (places that statistically have a 10% or 1% chance of flooding during
> a 12 month period) into OSM is a good idea. The OSM database is based
> on individual mappers, usually volunteers, entering data based on what
> they can see when they visit a place, or what they can see on aerial
> imagery. It would be difficult for individual mappers to confirm if a
> 10 or 100 year floodplain was entered incorrectly.
>

Verifiability is a problem.  I'm a little laxer than some, so if copyright
permitted I might
accept official government documents as sources.  Probably not, in this
particular
case, but maybe.  But it's not going to render, anyway, which would make it
useful only
to those who know how to use overpass-turbo.

Maybe uMap is the way to go for this.  Or a CSV file of co-ordinates fed
through a bit
of programming to produce a web page using Leaflet.  Either way would give
a slippy
map with pins which can display text such as risk level.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Peter Elderson]

It appears to be a specific type of farmland, so landuse=farmland + 
farmland=dehesa would say it all and disrupt nothing.

Mvg Peter Elderson

> Op 31 aug. 2019 om 12:25 heeft Diego Cruz  het volgende 
> geschreven:
> 
> Hi Cristoph,
> 
> Thank you for your feedback, it's really appreciated. You are completely 
> right when you say that dehesa might exclude similar environments in other 
> parts of the world, and that is of course not my intention. I just used the 
> word dehesa because it appears as such in Wikipedia. Among your three 
> proposals, I would go with landuse=agroforestry, because it would be a way of 
> reflecting this mixed usage of land without being too local. As for 
> establishing two different landuse tags for the same territory, it could be 
> fine for me, but I don't know if that would create rendering problems (as I 
> mentioned, I'm new to this). I don't think this should be resolved with 
> secondary tags, because a dehesa is an entity in itself and the uses of the 
> land are not subordinated to each other.
> 
> I will wait for more replies before modifying my proposal.
> 
> Best regards
> Diego
> 
>> El vie., 30 ago. 2019 a las 12:00, Christoph Hormann () 
>> escribió:
>> On Friday 30 August 2019, Diego Cruz wrote:
>> >
>> > I have recently proposed a new tag in the Wiki, because none of the
>> > existing landuse tags seem to match it. A dehesa is a type of land
>> > that combines a forest with either fields or pasturelands (or both)
>> > at the same time. It is extensively used in the Iberian Peninsula,
>> > both in Spain and Portugal. Please see the details in my proposal
>> > below:
>> >
>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dehesa
>> 
>> This is certainly a valid idea for inventing a new tag and it is good 
>> that you open up discussion early.  Let me take this as an example for 
>> two things that have in the past been decisive on the broader success 
>> of tags:
>> 
>> * local verifiability.  The primary definition of your tag is for areas 
>> in a certain region that are in the cultural tradition of that region 
>> called a certain way.  You try to list a few verifiable criteria what 
>> not to use the tag for - but these are one sided criteria.  Because 
>> natural=wood does not rule out use as pasture (and neither does 
>> landuse=orchard, which is also used for cork oak plantations), 
>> landuse=farmland does not rule out the presence of trees or the use as 
>> pasture and many savannas (for which we have no specific tag at the 
>> moment) are created by human influence.  A good tag is one where a 
>> local observer, even a casual one like a traveler quickly coming 
>> through, can without much difficulty determine locally if the tag 
>> applies or not.
>> 
>> * generic meaning.  As already mentioned you draft this as a region 
>> specific tag although agroforestry is a practice that exists in many 
>> different parts of the world in different forms.  Such tag will either 
>> stay a local speciality tag without much chance for being interpreted 
>> by global data users and possibly mirrored by other region specific 
>> tags with similar but slightly different meaning or it will morph into 
>> a broad umbrella tag - for example for any kind of 'area with trees 
>> that does not really qualify as wood/forest'.  Well known examples for 
>> such tags are natural=fell and landuse=village_green.
>> 
>> There are three potential tagging concepts i could imagine could be 
>> derived from your idea that would seem more promising in that regard:
>> 
>> * a tag for agroforestry landuse.  This of course would only be locally 
>> verifiable if there is active agricultural use.  That would only 
>> qualify those dehesas that are actively used for agriculture as such.  
>> And it would say very little about the physical appearance and 
>> ecological characteristics of an area.
>> 
>> * establishing a generic tagging concept for secondary characteristics 
>> of areas - like use of orchards as pasture, underbrush in a forest or 
>> scattered trees on a meadow.  This could be quite easily implemented 
>> using natural:secondary=*, landuse:secondary=* etc.  Dehesas would 
>> under such scheme be something like
>> 
>> - landuse=farmland + landuse:secondary=orchard
>> - landuse=meadow + landuse:secondary=orchard
>> - landuse=orchard + landuse:secondary=meadow
>> 
>> * creating one or more region specific secondary tags for exising 
>> primary tags like landuse=farmland or landuse=orchard for documenting 
>> the region specific ecological characteristics of the area.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Diego Cruz]

Hi Cristoph,

Thank you for your feedback, it's really appreciated. You are completely
right when you say that dehesa might exclude similar environments in other
parts of the world, and that is of course not my intention. I just used the
word dehesa because it appears as such in Wikipedia. Among your three
proposals, I would go with landuse=agroforestry, because it would be a way
of reflecting this mixed usage of land without being too local. As for
establishing two different landuse tags for the same territory, it could be
fine for me, but I don't know if that would create rendering problems (as I
mentioned, I'm new to this). I don't think this should be resolved with
secondary tags, because a dehesa is an entity in itself and the uses of the
land are not subordinated to each other.

I will wait for more replies before modifying my proposal.

Best regards
Diego

El vie., 30 ago. 2019 a las 12:00, Christoph Hormann ()
escribió:

> On Friday 30 August 2019, Diego Cruz wrote:
> >
> > I have recently proposed a new tag in the Wiki, because none of the
> > existing landuse tags seem to match it. A dehesa is a type of land
> > that combines a forest with either fields or pasturelands (or both)
> > at the same time. It is extensively used in the Iberian Peninsula,
> > both in Spain and Portugal. Please see the details in my proposal
> > below:
> >
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dehesa
>
> This is certainly a valid idea for inventing a new tag and it is good
> that you open up discussion early.  Let me take this as an example for
> two things that have in the past been decisive on the broader success
> of tags:
>
> * local verifiability.  The primary definition of your tag is for areas
> in a certain region that are in the cultural tradition of that region
> called a certain way.  You try to list a few verifiable criteria what
> not to use the tag for - but these are one sided criteria.  Because
> natural=wood does not rule out use as pasture (and neither does
> landuse=orchard, which is also used for cork oak plantations),
> landuse=farmland does not rule out the presence of trees or the use as
> pasture and many savannas (for which we have no specific tag at the
> moment) are created by human influence.  A good tag is one where a
> local observer, even a casual one like a traveler quickly coming
> through, can without much difficulty determine locally if the tag
> applies or not.
>
> * generic meaning.  As already mentioned you draft this as a region
> specific tag although agroforestry is a practice that exists in many
> different parts of the world in different forms.  Such tag will either
> stay a local speciality tag without much chance for being interpreted
> by global data users and possibly mirrored by other region specific
> tags with similar but slightly different meaning or it will morph into
> a broad umbrella tag - for example for any kind of 'area with trees
> that does not really qualify as wood/forest'.  Well known examples for
> such tags are natural=fell and landuse=village_green.
>
> There are three potential tagging concepts i could imagine could be
> derived from your idea that would seem more promising in that regard:
>
> * a tag for agroforestry landuse.  This of course would only be locally
> verifiable if there is active agricultural use.  That would only
> qualify those dehesas that are actively used for agriculture as such.
> And it would say very little about the physical appearance and
> ecological characteristics of an area.
>
> * establishing a generic tagging concept for secondary characteristics
> of areas - like use of orchards as pasture, underbrush in a forest or
> scattered trees on a meadow.  This could be quite easily implemented
> using natural:secondary=*, landuse:secondary=* etc.  Dehesas would
> under such scheme be something like
>
> - landuse=farmland + landuse:secondary=orchard
> - landuse=meadow + landuse:secondary=orchard
> - landuse=orchard + landuse:secondary=meadow
>
> * creating one or more region specific secondary tags for exising
> primary tags like landuse=farmland or landuse=orchard for documenting
> the region specific ecological characteristics of the area.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> 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] How to tag flood prone points and areas?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

It appears that most features with the tag "flood_prove=yes" are
covered by water on a somewhat frequent basis, perhaps once every year
or two, to once a month, or even more often during a rainy season.

However, I believe most of these features are prone to "flash
flooding", since they are often mapped in dry areas like Australia,
and the description says: "Whether or not the feature is likely to
flood after very heavy rain."

So this tag might be appropriate if the features that you want to tag
are somewhat frequently flooded, like at least once every year or two,
or more often.

If your survey data was more on the basis of "this feature has a 1% to
10% chance of flooding on an annual basis", that is, 10 year or 100
year flood risks, then I would use a different tag, not
"flood_prone=yes/no".

But it's also questionable if entering 10 year or 100 year flood zones
(places that statistically have a 10% or 1% chance of flooding during
a 12 month period) into OSM is a good idea. The OSM database is based
on individual mappers, usually volunteers, entering data based on what
they can see when they visit a place, or what they can see on aerial
imagery. It would be difficult for individual mappers to confirm if a
10 or 100 year floodplain was entered incorrectly.

In contrast, it's easier for mappers to verify if a tag like
flood_prone=yes is correct on a highway if there are signs that say
"flash flood area" or "floodway" or similar, or if the area floods
after every heavy rain and this is common local knowledge.

Joseph Eisenberg

On 8/31/19, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 13:23, Immaculate Mwanja <
> immaculate.mwa...@hotosm.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> After collecting all the information, we decided we should upload them in
>> OSM to be shared with the world since it was a successful project to some
>> extent. The challenge came when we could not upload these data since
>> there
>> is no specific tag to use for amenities or AoIs affected by floods, the
>> only tag that we could find is flood_prone=yes
>>  but this is mostly
>> applicable to “roads/ways" that go underwater after heavy rains.
>>
> Had a read of the tag & while it does say roads & ways, I can't really see
> any reason why you couldn't use it for other POIs?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>

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