> But deprecating landuse=forest of redefining lanes tag is not going to happen.
I believe you, and I think active deprecation is not advocated in this discussion. It's about facilitating a better alternative beside landuse=forest, for situations where te landuse is in fact niet forestry but e.g. residential or military, 2018-06-07 18:41 GMT+02:00 Mateusz Konieczny <[email protected]>: > I responded to "what's wrong with getting rid of these bad choices?" > > I see nothing wrong with using landcover=trees. > > But in context of this discussion I understood "bad choices" as > landuse=forest. > > BTW, I am happy to fix some broken tagging - for example I am regularly > hunting down > demolished=yes (for example on buildings), made/make multiple mechanical > edits > cleaning up tags (yes, it is approved by local community and follows > mechanical edit policy). > > But deprecating landuse=forest of redefining lanes tag is not going to > happen. > > 7. Jun 2018 16:11 by [email protected]: > > > Rendering landcover=trees is not the same as deprecating landuse=forest. > > It just offers the option to tag tree-covered areas on a different landuse > such as industrial, military, residential or commercial. > > I do expect a shift from landuse=forest to landcover=trees, as soon as it > would be rendered. > > Not because of retagging of all forests, but because of tagging the > smaller treecovered patches mainly in residential areas, which are now > either mistagged as forests, orchards, parks and gardens, or are not tagged > at all because it isn't landuse as it is defined in the wiki. > > > 2018-06-07 15:36 GMT+02:00 Mateusz Konieczny <[email protected]>: > >> >> >> >> 7. Jun 2018 11:53 by [email protected]: >> >> On 7 June 2018 at 10:46, Christoph Hormann <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> There are tons of established tags in OSM where the key makes no sense >> at all. Don't get me started on 'waterway' for example. But that is >> how OSM works. Get over it, accept that people have made bad choices >> of keys when choosing tags and concentrate on encouraging and helping >> people to choose suitable keys when newly creating tags (in a >> productive way of course, not just by rejecting any idea as bad). >> >> >> And what's wrong with getting rid of these bad choices? >> >> >> Cost, effort and confusion is not worth positive effects. >> >> >> Revolutions are really rarely worth costs. >> >> >> Making tagging more consistent is not one of this cases. >> >> >> Improvements are possible but not when it starts from "deprecate >> landuse=forest because it is not used to tag land use". >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > > > -- > Vr gr Peter Elderson > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > -- Vr gr Peter Elderson
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
