It would certainly make sense to me to have the land cover and the land use as separate tags, not dependent upon each other.
-------Original Email------- Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Way out west >From :mailto:[email protected] Date :Sun Feb 07 21:27:26 America/Chicago 2010 I have been noticing this. My theory, not yet confirmed by actually looking at the data, is that this is due to tags on polygons from the massgis open space or similar import. I think there are parcels that have tags like landuse=reservoir, and this means that those parcels are used for reservoir protection, and then there is an actual reservoir inside somewhere. I am not currently thinking there is a rendering bug, but a data bug, and probably a bot edit will be in order to fix this up. There's a similar, more complicated situation. In this case I've been there and the aerial imagery is definitely accurate. http://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/?mt0=mapnik&mt1=googlehybrid&lon=-71.26785&lat=42.41243&zoom=14 There's a further, harder, issue lurking which is that we have landuse, natural, and leisure=recreation_ground, and these are all not orthogonal and kind of messy. There are several separate issues: the legal status and broad use of a parcel use of specific sub-parcel areas the land cover (trees, open, water) I think it would be useful to have landuse and landcover be separate. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- John F. Eldredge -- [email protected] "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
