On 24/01/19 01:34, althio wrote:
I might be missing something in these threads, but I would expect...
for managed forest areas with unknown or unspecified use:
landuse=forestry
Why not natural=wood? That does not exclude "managed".
Other things may also be "managed" - swamps, lakes, heath and scrub for
instance.
How do you know it is 'managed'???
If you know it is "managed" .. what is it "managed" for?
Should there be a tagging system for this "management"?
If so it has to be separate from trees as those are not the only thing
that are managed.
for managed forest areas used primarily to grow wood as
timber/fuel/... or anything else:
landuse=forestry
+ forestry = logging/timber/leisure/wildlife/*
The key produce can be used to specify the output, just as it can be for
the farmers field.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:produce
There are no OSM tags to specify leisure/wildlife .. and those could be
applied to lakes, national parks, etc.
This kind of scheme seems to allow incremental mapping which is in my
opinion desirable.
-- althio
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 13:36, Paul Allen <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 08:29, Mateusz Konieczny
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
You may prefer to use landuse=logging or something that has a
clear meaning
rather than landuse=forestry to tag areas used primarily to
grow wood.
Given the wikipedia page you pointed to earlier in the thread, I
agree that
landuse=forestry is a bad idea (almost as bad as landuse=forest
was). ...
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
