> On Sep 15, 2015, at 6:44 PM, Jerry Clough - OSM <sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> No there is nothing I'm aware of which discriminates anywhere between
> cultivated pears in general (Pyrus communis) & specific cultivars
> ('Conference' <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conference_pear>). Cultivar just
> is shorthand for "cultivated variety" so of course there is no hierarchy
> variety=>cultivar.
I guess I was looking for an idea of where people draw the lines between the
trees, like we can with potatoes and sweet potatoes. I know there are many many
kinds of both, but usually they can easily be divided into two groups, because
we can say that a potato and a sweet potato are commonly referred to by those
two separate names, and usually not confused with each other by the people that
grow them and consume them.
I am very comfortable throwing all grapes into “grapevines” or all oranges
into “orange_trees” - but I don’t know about some obviously different fruits
that share the same words - Asian pears look different, taste different - and
most importantly - not considered a “pear” by the people that grow them -
“pears” are “western pears” to them. So I feel comfortable saying that having
“pear_trees” and “sand_pear_trees” is a good idea.
But when it comes to all the other trees I have never heard of until I was
cleaning up that list (is a "Governor’s plum" a plum? Is a “Custard Apple” an
Apple?), I was looking to see if there is some known way of putting the trees
into usable categories or types for mapping without having people suggest them
one by one - otherwise we’ll get odd regional or slang names - or things
possibly grouped by distant mappers who don’t understand the nuances - like me
with some of these trees.
Javbw
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
