Talk:Tag:natural=shrubbery
Use on multipolygon?
Areas can be multipolygons. Shouldn't this tag be applicable to multipolygons? --Peter Elderson (talk) 05:44, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- It is. Multipolygons are relations, but seem to fall under 'area' on the wiki. (See natural=scrub, natural=wood, landuse=grass. --JeroenHoek (talk) 06:05, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, right. Never noticed. Found it on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:ValueDescription/doc#Feature_usage
Rendering
From comments in the voting I learned, that the mappers, this tag is meant to appeal to, are very sensitive to rendering. I made an attempt to persuade the cartographers of OSM-Carto to render the tag, so as to give it an initial boost, that other tags never had. It did not get turned down out of some principle, still, it was put on hold, to wait for the number of uses to grow and spread to more countries, so as to have some real base to decide on the popularity and actual use. C.f. https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4473 - saved here for future reference.
To drive up the numbers, it might prove worthwhile to contact some of the mappers, that use natural=scrub for what actually are better tagged shrubberies.
Alone in the NL, the three top active scrub mappers (Lachgast, KiaaTiX, JeroenHoek - c.f. https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1biq) might easily add 10,000+ mappings of shrubbery by mere retagging. As to worldwide use spread, to get at mappers, that are potential power users of the shrubbery tag, the method of looking for scrub, that actually is shrubbery, might prove a bit more involved.
I looked in the area of my local knowledge, for shrubberies tagged as scrub, the feature is not mapped that much in AT. Found and retagged 4 occurrences without asking. I do not expect any conflicts out of that, as it is just an upgrade to a more concise mapping. Mateusz Konieczny was so kind to spot another ~5 in the city of Kraków, PL. It is rare there too. I do not dare to retag, been there, but too long ago to remember and not that much into shrubberies, as to ask the original mappers. --Hungerburg (talk) 18:23, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Hungerburg:, @Cartographer10: I've thought with Cartographer10 about this, and we concluded that re-tagging of existing miss-tagged scrub is probably hurtful to getting this tag accepted more broadly at this moment. Even if I tagged something scrub myself before this tag existed, replacing it could come across as harmful to the (rendered) map by other mappers and users.
- There is one possible exception though: barrier=hedge with area=yes now renders in a broken manner in Carto, and will remain broken. Here re-tagging to natural=shrubbery with shrubbery:density=dense will often be possible (although this should not be automated I think). There are quite a lot of those in the Netherlands, due to our availability of municipal infrastructure layers in JOSM, which often gives the exact outlines of such areas, and which are then used by local mappers. I would like to know if there is some support for this in the Carto team though. They've indicated a willingness to consider a replacement for barrier=hedge with area=yes in of the related issues on Github though. --JeroenHoek (talk) 07:04, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- @JeroenHoek: Hedge area rendering is blocked by combining barrier around, with area - and not considering it as a tagging mistake. It is one of main blockers for hedge area rendering in OSM Carto. https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/12TV https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/12TS may be useful for detecting some types of bad mapping. See https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4200#issuecomment-692014951 Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:49, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: From what I've grasped from the lengthy discussions on this topic the combination of area=yes and barrier=hedge will simply not get rendered again as an area. barrier=hedge is now, in Carto, a linear only element, and all hedges purposely mapped as areas are rendered in a broken manner as a side-effect. Considering barrier=hedge as exclusively linear is perhaps acceptable outside of Carto as well; many barrier=* tags are exclusively linear. With natural=shrubbery we have a tagging standard that can fill this gap. In particular its combination with shrubbery:density=dense can be used to replace many area=yes with barrier=hedge. Would you be willing to work with me on getting preliminary rendering for natural=shrubbery into Carto? It would give mappers a valid alternative for the currently broken rendering of area hedges (and make a lot of people happy). --JeroenHoek (talk) 12:26, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- What you linked repeats problem I mentioned "we interpret barrier=* tags on polygons to mean this polygon is enclosed by a barrier of specified type. This is the by far most widespread use of barrier=* tags on polygons." Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:48, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- Exactly. So that means that barrier=* is not really suitable for areas that act as barriers right? For hedges natural=shrubbery (which is always an area, never a linear feature by definition) can be used as a replacement. Often this means using shrubbery:density=dense in combination. --JeroenHoek (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- What you linked repeats problem I mentioned "we interpret barrier=* tags on polygons to mean this polygon is enclosed by a barrier of specified type. This is the by far most widespread use of barrier=* tags on polygons." Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:48, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: From what I've grasped from the lengthy discussions on this topic the combination of area=yes and barrier=hedge will simply not get rendered again as an area. barrier=hedge is now, in Carto, a linear only element, and all hedges purposely mapped as areas are rendered in a broken manner as a side-effect. Considering barrier=hedge as exclusively linear is perhaps acceptable outside of Carto as well; many barrier=* tags are exclusively linear. With natural=shrubbery we have a tagging standard that can fill this gap. In particular its combination with shrubbery:density=dense can be used to replace many area=yes with barrier=hedge. Would you be willing to work with me on getting preliminary rendering for natural=shrubbery into Carto? It would give mappers a valid alternative for the currently broken rendering of area hedges (and make a lot of people happy). --JeroenHoek (talk) 12:26, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- @JeroenHoek: Hedge area rendering is blocked by combining barrier around, with area - and not considering it as a tagging mistake. It is one of main blockers for hedge area rendering in OSM Carto. https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/12TV https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/12TS may be useful for detecting some types of bad mapping. See https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4200#issuecomment-692014951 Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:49, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
Not shrubberies or natural
This is an extraordinary poorly named tag. All the examples are not shrubberies, merely planting of shrubs. Nor are they natural, these are garden or soft landscape features. I think many of the same points were made in some of the proposals. (I have no objection to mapping them, but I would suggest finding a term which is more aligned with what they are. SK53 (talk) 19:06, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Is it for area or just plants?
Lets say that there are plants shaped into form of word WELCOME, with mulch around them. Which shape should be used for this object?
If geometry of natural=shrubbery is supposed to be limited to plants - how to tag entire area?
If geometry of natural=shrubbery is supposed to be entire area - how to tag shapes formed by plants?
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)