Hello, there. I hope this will not start a flamewar: I noticed that, despite being widely used, Awaiting your answers, Regards. asked 05 Apr '18, 18:54 Penegal |
I think this is a problem to be discussed on Tagging list, not here: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging After that you can update wiki documentation and go back to the rendering. answered 05 Apr '18, 20:13 kocio I did so, without comments for now, so I also asked here to see if I can get some comments before changing anything.
(06 Apr '18, 09:49)
Penegal
|
note that for forest parcels an own tag exists, too: answered 05 Apr '18, 21:34 aseerel4c26 ♦ I saw that, but that tagging scheme seems to be far less used than
(06 Apr '18, 09:50)
Penegal
2
The fundamental problem with forest + ref is that you then have to break up a named forest into individual parcels and then have to use some complicated mechanism such as a site relation to restore the name. Further individual forests may also have identifiers in national forest inventories. Furthermore the ref combination is not extensively used in Europe and when it is it applies to the whole forest (one just SW of Bordeaux, one in Swiss commune of Sembrancher, around Sundsvall, Sweden) or is not obviously an identifier (in Trentino-Adige, Tirol). I presume many of the actual usages are imports.
(06 Apr '18, 11:29)
SK53 ♦
|