Changeset: 46393195
removal of superfluous trees
Closed by scleija
Tags
created_by | iD 2.1.3 |
---|---|
host | https://www.openstreetmap.org/id |
imagery_used | Ortho 2016 geoportail.lu |
locale | en-US |
Discussion
-
Comment from Stereo
Hi, and welcome to OSM!
We have a low-traffic Luxembourg mailing list at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lu
and a slow wiki at wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/LuxembourgWhy were these trees superfluous? If someone’s taken the time to map trees, they must have been important to them.
Happy mapping,
Guillaume
-
Comment from Verdy_p
I agree, notably for this place where it is a public parc with significant public investments by the municipality: this is a place to visit and take leasure time.
The only reason why one would remove them would be to add more precise data with species, tree sizes... This is not just a large area of grass.
Public leisure parks are frequently detailed with trees, paths, leisure equipements for children, toilets, recycling bins. Trees offer shadows in summer time and are part of the landscape when walking, or limit places where you can physically walk, or play ball games... -
Comment from Stereo
Hi! I've re-planted the trees at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46441452
-
Comment from scleija
If there were only one tree in the entire park, it would make sense to add a tree, as a landmark, that would actually help the map reader. There are many trees in the park, like in a forest. The use of the area tool is sufficient. The addition of random trees does not make the map better, it just makes it cluttered. As for shade in Luxembourg... You don't need a tree on a map to find shade in Luxembourg, where there are trees galore, and where the sun only shines 90 days a year.
But if you want to follow my every change. Happy mapping.
-
Comment from Stereo
Are you maybe coming from Wikipedia, which has notability criteria? OpenStreetMap has no such thing (although in practical terms, people don't usually map things that are smaller than 30 cm).
The welcome guide for Wikipedians (
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users#We_don.27t_have_a_Notability_rule ) explicitly mentions individual trees. People have mapped all kinds of stuff that will never be relevant to me, and that's great!https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=tree finds 7.6M trees on the planet. In some cities, every individual tree has been mapped - look at Nice or Bucarest for example.
For trees that are landmarks, e.g. the Arbres remarquables au Luxembourg, we add the denomination=natural_monument tag.
I do try to welcome newbies to OSM in my area, answer any questions, and so on. The community watches not every edit, but as you've discovered, it's quick to get chatty when the consensus isn't followed.
These messages are dry and cold - want to chat about it with a beer one evening?
-
Comment from Verdy_p
I'm not a newbie on OSM. An no, I'm not concerned about Wikipedia notability rules which are independant. In fact wood areas make sense (instead of indivual trees) when the trees are packed together (with touching/mixing branches and leaves) and the area includes trees with very variable sizes and other plants on lower layers, or broken branches and a natural soil. And wooded areas are only suitable when this is more than just a handful of trees.
For trees that are planted on planted grass lands, they are treated indivually and cleared from surrounding natural plants or broken branches and dead leaves. It is highly artificial. These trees are better mapped individually, they'll appear and disappear individually, and they are in fact using simpler geometry than mapping areas, and are easier to edit too.
-
Comment from Verdy_p
Those that don't like indivusal trees would prefer mapping areas for adding things such as species (but in fact this is wrong in many cases as wooded areas and forest have many species and trees are not the only elements), or want to map owned parcels of land. Take this map example, there's a correct wooded area near the river, but also individual trees in it! this should not happen (except for remarquable trees, that will be mapped with species, total radius, radius of trunk at ground level, total height (not including leaves and new tiny banches less than one year), age, or tags for its historic preservation, or for notable features such as passages in the trunk, or mounted features on them (including painted landmarks or other signals),...
Nodes (1-20 of 35)
- 1
- 2
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |