From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


  • What's the advantage of natural=landform vs. just natural=* and cutting out the middleman? Looked at from the other direction, why not use natural=landform for EVERYTHING, except maybe something obvious like water or trees. natural=tundra seems like a prime example where landform tagging is gratuitous. On the other hand, more abstract terrain features like moraines, pingos, and eskers seem to have more of a claim to landform, in the same way that place=bay or place=cove might be less sloppy for a node than natural=bay. --Hamish 01:08, 9 September 2012 (BST)
I think this tag was created to easier transform CanVec data into OSM tags. i.e. instead of finding out that a specific CanVec code is natural=sand they have used the CanVec documentation and found out it is natural=landform+landform=sand. In other words, natural=landform is the result of sloppy research, and as you say, most of these tags can be substituted with existing natural=* or similar tags, for the few that is missing, a proper proposal (for example natural=tundra instead of natural=landform+landform=tundra) would be more helpful. --Skippern 18:50, 9 September 2012 (BST)
And surprise, somebody have found out by themselves they could tag it, and even started a proposal 2 years ago?! --Skippern 18:53, 9 September 2012 (BST)