Talk:Tag:natural=blockfield

Clarifying what appears to be controversial

To summarize, I've been reading as many sources and studies as I can find, and consulting with a few expert groups, but I've found it difficult to come up with a conclusion that is both comprehensive and comprehensive enough for the average user. As you know, OSM is not a platform for publishing very in-depth research results, and I think we just need to provide information that can help the average person who uses maps, but due to the slightly different wording and conclusions depending on the point of view, it was not easy to come up with a unified conclusion that can help the average user. Nevertheless, I'll try to clarify some of the things that I've realized during my research and investigation that may be questionable. If I learn something new, or if someone else can clarify something, please feel free to correct, supplement, or discuss with me.

What caused it to form

Terms like block field, boulder field, etc. are sometimes used to mean the same thing, sometimes a little different, and even Wikipedia has a separate entry for stone run when they seem similar on the surface, so picking a single word is a challenge. So we picked the most common word, "block field," and whatever the word is, it's broadly described as either the long result of glacial activity or the long result of volcanic activity (we're not trying to contribute to geology with OSM, so it's hard to see how there's any difference between the two and why they should be separated). Furthermore, the consequences of glacial activity on rocks can take many forms, as can the mechanisms by which volcanic activity shapes rock landforms, but in any case, what we are trying to understand and describe here is that rock landforms are the result of two main things: glacial activity and volcanic activity.

Why I think it's appropriate to tag dry wetland together

I think it's good to categorize objects with similar properties with similar or identical tags (it's silly to put a right shoe and a left shoe in different categories just because you can't swap them), but it's good to be able to discriminate. The "pile of rocks I'm referring to here" has the following in common: it's the result of volcanic or glacial activity, it's made up of rocks with at least some mass, and it has a pupil underneath. The difference is that the "dry wetland I'm showing here" is made up of volcanic rocks that have bubbles and so on, so it's a geology that's prone to peat accumulation because mosses and other things can grow on it. (I've found areas with similar geology or vegetation in a few places around the world, but it's hard to tell how they came to be, what kind of rocks they are, etc. I've added some images in the 'Gallery' for reference). I also didn't find any instances of this vegetation in block fields that were made up of rock types other than volcanic rocks with bubbles.

About using the 'wetland=bog' tag on a 'natural=blockfield'

As you may have noticed, the OSM wiki requires that the 'wetland=bog' tag be subordinate to the 'natural=wetland' tag. This is not an error, but there are some so-called 'dry wetlands' in the wetland category. E.g.  Gotjawal_Forest Furthermore, if you don't use the parent tag (the 'natural=wetland' tag), there is no conflict, so we made an exception and allowed you to use the 'wetland=bog' tag instead of the 'natural=wetland' tag. --깨몽/dreamy (talk) 03:32, 17 October 2023 (UTC)