|
First some background: I would like to map a park in my city more accurcately. Right now it is only shown as a cemetery on osm.org (tagged both And then to the question: How should I map the landcover (mostly grass, with a few trees and bushes)? Like my language might hint at, I've understood that the landcover tag is most appropriate. However, looking at a few of the other parks in town, they use |
|
In general stick with widely used tags, natural for trees and any patches of wood and bushes (but not for plantings of shrubs). You can also use landuse=grass, but at the very least subtag it in some way (e.g. grass=*). Add paths (whether on grass or not), and other amenities (benches, waste baskets, drinking water etc). The main problem of using landcover tags is that they represent '''another''' way of tagging things for which there already exist well-established tags which have been in use for over 10 years. This is an example of the problem alluded to here by XKCD You can change the landuse=cemetery tag to disused:landuse=cemetery, which conveys useful information. I know of at least one cemetery in London which is also a park, a nature reserve and a wood. Although burials no longer take place there, it is emphatically still a cemetery: Abney Park. This is one example of a park with similar origins. The areas described as meadows are 'no-mow' places which because the park grass has not been fertilised are florally divers. What do you mean by subtagging the grass? I couldn't find any info on the wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass). I'll ask from others and visit the park again before retagging as disused:landuse=cemetery, but thanks for the suggestion.
(22 May '16, 12:08)
valtteri
|
