Proposal:Trees
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Trees | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Abandoned (inactive) |
| Proposed by: | myfanwy |
| Tagging: | natural=trees |
| Statistics: |
|
| Rendered as: | * |
| Draft started: | |
| Proposed on: | * |
| Vote start: | * |
| Vote end: | * |
New value: natural=trees
For a line of trees
- This could also be an area and might be better than such terms as "wood" and "forest" which have local cultural implications. MikeCollinson 02:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- When there is 3 or 4 trees I would just use the individual tree tag 3-4 times. If there is a cluster, it may be a small woods, wich the tag exsists for. In terms of many trees, there isnt really an approprate tag for when there is many trees but its too open to be called a forest. (New forest has many examples). I think this tag, unlike natural=tree, is unneeded though. Ben. 03:48 23 Decemeber 2006 (UTC)
- I have added Proposed features/life which may overlap this proposal. --TimSC 20:14, 3 June 2007 (BST)
- I'd like to see this unified with Proposed features/Tree. --Hawke 18:54, 11 June 2007 (BST)
- I dislike this one here. If it's one tree I natual=tree on the node is nice, if it's more I'd suggest to use natural=wood. Ramack 12:57, 19 July 2007 (BST)