https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=brownfield is absolutely not correct, have you reverted? Which changesets?
They are still wood even if burnt so natural=wood should apply. I have thought about if we should map burnt areas, it's tricky because while it is surveyable, it changes quickly and the point at when it changes to no longer burnt is subjective. For those reasons I do think it's better to store this in another database not OSM. There you can capture the burn date and degree of the burn. If you use burt=yes, it means you need to start cutting up your natural=wood polygons, which I don't think it's worth it. On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 08:40, Warin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > A German mapper in Carbargo has used landuse=brownfield to map burnt areas. > > > One such area is a recreation ground... so it would be burnt grass. > > > Is it a good idea to map such things? > > It could be said this is 'temporary' so not something OSM should map. > > > If so, how should it be tagged? > > It is not really a landuse, nor a landcover. > > Possibly a new key as a property key, say, burnt=yes? > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
