> “We will would like to map land cover in an area near the Amazonian forest”
I’d recommend that you start by mapping the existing forested areas with natural=wood or landuse=forest, and areas of water with natural=water and water=lake / =river, or natural=wetland for swamps, marshes, mangroves, bogs, etc. If you can clearly identify other types of vegetation (from aerial imagery, I assume?) there are several specific tags that can be used. You should not tag something non-specific like “clearing” or “bare ground”. Natural=scrub is used for areas mainly covered shrubs or bushes, eg woody plants about 1m to 3m in height, natura=heath is for dwarf shrubs (probably only found in the high Andes on Colombia), natural=grassland can be used for alpine areas above the treeline (though these may also be heath or wetland=bog). Areas of rocky land without vegetation can be natural=bare_rock, =sand, =scree, =shingle The most relevant tags for landcover with heavy human use in Colombia might be landuse=orchard for palm oil, banana, and coffee plantations, landuse=farmland for seasonal or annual crops, landuse=meadow for pasture and hay fields, landuse=residential / =industrial for developed areas with houses / industry. The idea should be to map as specifically as possible. If you are not certain of the type of vegetation or landuse for a certain area, then leave that place untagged for now. Someday a local person can add the proper tagging by visiting that place in person. Re: the landcover tags. These have not been approved by the community, though there is a small, vocal minority that wants to use them instead of the established tags that start with landuse= and natural=. I would not use these, because there are much more widely used equivalents that are approved or in use for many years. Don’t use landcover=trees; use natural=wood or landuse=forest.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
