On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 1:09 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I know we already talked about this, but actually no actions followed ;-) > > > > What is the current feeling for a new key "landcover"? Could resolve > > many issues, as often landuse is a mixture of actual "use" and > > "coverage". > > I like it. Presumably it's to be precise - you draw only the area > that's covered by said landcover, as opposed to landuse which can > include small amounts of others within its boundaries. The following > landuse values should then be landcover: > *basin (probably) > *forest (most uses, but some such as national forests should remain > landuse) > *grass > *meadow > *orchard > *reservoir > and possibly others. I would go further and have landuse=agricultural > with the current landuse values like farm and greenhouse_horticulture > changed to landcover. > > In general, I like the idea. But I don't think the agricultural tags should be changed from landuse--they describe how the land is used. For example, forest describes what covers the land (trees), while orchard describes what those trees are used for (growing fruit).
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
