2014-08-20 19:45 GMT+02:00 Rob Nickerson <[email protected]>:
> Wood: Woodland with no forestry > Forest: Managed woodland or woodland plantation. > > In my eyes this is pretty clear. What am I missing / why does there seem > to be so much confusion? > This difference is impossible to maintain during mapping as typically forests are mapped from aerial images. And checking whatever it is woodland without forestry requires extensive survey (what worse, just visiting forest is not enough). Anyway, I am unsure whatever there any example of properly mapped natural=wood in Europe (assuming that this rules are considered valid). I am pretty sure that every single forest is in some way maintained by humans (at the very least - blocking access etc in NRs). Also, reading infobox is not enough. Starting paragraph on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dforest "Some use this tag for land primarily managed for timber production, others uses if for woodland that is in some way maintained by humans."
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
