On 09/08/2009, at 8:17 AM, Jason Cunningham wrote: > Wood and Forest have not had clear definitions for centuries in the > UK, and as Mike Harris states the trees within Forests were > incidental (the famous Sherwood Forest was mostly heathland).
Just because it's called a "Forest" doesn't mean that it should be tagged as landuse=forest. I know several a few Lakes without water, and Beaches that no longer have a beach. > Looking at the discussion Mike Harris has already suggested the tags > I would suggest, but I may as well repeat them > natural=woodland land covered with trees (Minimum Crown Cover = 20%) > landuse=forestry Does landuse=forestry mean that it is a managed forest (like landuse=forest was supposed to), or that it is an area used by the timber industry? For the latter you could make the distinction between natural=wood;landuse=forestry (old-growth) and landuse=farm;produce=tree (plantation). _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
