Hi
I think there are a few reasons, but let's start with the basics:
For two things so similar it's confusing to have two separate key
values: natural & landuse. IMO both should use natural (which trees are
of course).
Any description of their management/harvesting should be put into sub
tags. However I will go as far as to say there a very few areas of trees
in the world that have been manipulated by humans in some form or manner.
If there is any differences between wood & forest I would say it's in
their size and/or density, but I've no idea where you'd put the dividing
line.
David F.
On 20/08/2014 18:45, Rob Nickerson wrote:
Hi,
Sorry to raise this issue again but it really does need resolving:
* for ensuring good data; and
* to prevent forest and wood being rendered as the same thing [1]
Currently the descriptions in the green box on the right of the wiki
page (and thus those that get picked up by taginfo and other software)
are:
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?
Regards,
Rob
[1]
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/647#issuecomment-52756701
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
