Proposal:Vineyard

The proposal Vineyard was built without a vote and the tagging is widely established based on this proposal. The Feature Page for the proposal Vineyard is located at Tag:landuse=vineyard.

Vineyard
Proposal status:	Proposals with undefined or invalid status (inactive)
Proposed by:	NiCK.n17
Tagging:	landuse=vineyard Data item
Applies to:	area
Definition:	Vineyard area
Statistics:
Draft started:
Proposed on:	2007-11-06
RFC start:	2007-11-27

(updated by Ramack 2007-11-27)

Description

Area used by the vineyard. Comments are welcome.

Tags

Applies to areas:

<tag k="landuse" v="vineyard"/>

Rendering

Area filled light green. With even lighter small green lines. Maybe with a grape in it.

Ojw's scribblings:

(i.e. it's a grid of smallish plants you can walk between, so maybe a white background helps visualise that)

Comments

• I once brought this tag up on IRC, and it was suggested to base it on something more general, like landuse=farm, produce=grape. I agree with these other suggestions, since that way, a renderer first only needs to support the generic landuse tag (which Mapnik and osmarender do I think) and can then refine if needed. --Colin Marquardt 13:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that this form of agriculture warrants its own tag. landuse=farm,produce=grape may technically be correct but nobody will ever say "I'm on a farm" when he is in a vineyard - a vineyard as a completely different impact on the landscape. I would prefer landuse=vineyard. --Frederik Ramm 23:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

As there normaly is no farm next to the vineyard, i would supporrt Frederiks proposal. raphael 10:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I support the proposal. To avoid flooding ``landuse tag values, I propose the name agriculture instead of farm as tag value, i.e., landuse=agriculture, produce=grape. The tag produce can have other values like corn, hops etc. --BerndR 16:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

On maps, there are often a spezial rendering for vineyard (on swiss Maps it this a standard detail). It is a fact, this part of agriculture are dont move for 25 years ore longer. A vineyard can be landmarke. --Bobo11 20:47, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

In addition, a vineyard area has a name, "appellation d'orgine", which is often well-known. --BerndR 16:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I support Frederiks point because vineyards are usually used as vineyards for a looong period of time. --friedel 20:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I also support landuse=vineyard, because vine-making is more than just producing grape. Same would also apply around the Mediterranean Sea to landuse=olive-grove (how do you call in English an area where olive tree are grown ?) --Gummibaerli 18:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I also think vineyards are important enough (at least in some areas) to have a own landuse value -- ramack 19:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

that's a very euro-centric viewpoint. vineyards yes are important in italy and france, but not in vietnam, or new zealand, or haiti or nigeria. in fact, world wide, they are utterly insignificant and we need to view this in the broader context of the world. if we're going to suggest they are important, then we need landuse=sheep_farm for new zealand (very important here), landuse=rice_paddy for china and so on, which is a horrible way of doing things. keep it simple, keep it consistent, keep it global Myfanwy 19:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I think the same applies for landuse=orchard. David.earl 19:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I was going to mention orchard before I started reading the comments. That seems to make a good case for something like landuse=agriculture, produce=grape. If not, then after voting opens someone should make a parrell proposal for landuse=orchard (or combine it into this vote?). - LastGrape 11:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• We should be cautious if we really want to have a pletora of landuse=xy tags for this. I can easily think of lot's of "long term" agricultural landuse, which can serve as a landmark and by this logic would all get it's own landuse value: vineyard, orchard, olive_grove, paddy (ricefield), banana, coffee, tea, cocoa, ... I tend to think that having something like landuse=farm, produce=xy would be better. Renderers can then pick up the fruits they want to show and use a generic way to show "all the other". -- Ulfl 00:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm with Ulfl on this one. A hierarchy would be useful for all the users (such as the cycle rendering) that might not be interested in subtle variations. I would suggest *not* putting this into the general landuse key, but instead have a specialist sub-key that renders can ignore. Having to maintain extremely large lists of landuses (imagine how many types of farm, residential, industrial areas there could be) is tedious and doesn't give us anything. Gravitystorm 13:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

yeah, i agree - there is constant abuse of the landuse tag, whenever the proposer can't/won't make the effort to properly categories the tag. landuse is *not* a dumping ground for random tags that don't fit nicely into other categories Myfanwy 19:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree: OSM tag structure must be human friendly. Adding information to OSM must be friendly, easy and funny. Complexer rendering rules? - not a real problem. And the data for handhelds/mobile devices has to be converted anyway. Any optimizing here, for the computers only, is not needed. It should also be possible to have tags like landuse=olive_grove and others. --Bass 04:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• This one is kind of tricky. For the current mapping activities I'd support the landuse=vineyard tag. For sanity reasons it would make sense to introduce the landuse=agriculture / produce=xyz combination as soon as the render and other conversion software can handle it. The data base change might be possible by an automated process. --ThomasKlosa 01:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

• No other comments about this? In case we have a lot of vineyards here, it would be great if this could be rendered. What about aproving this feature? --Astrofreak85 15:42, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

• a vineyard is a type of farm, adding a tag for a sub-type of that seems unnecessary - why not tag as man_made=farm crop=grapes or produce=wine? there are many good reasons for keeping everything under a logical, hierarchical set of tags. yes, it does more than grow the grapes - in which case it is an Proposed features/Industrial Plant. also, this is not a landuse tag. Myfanwy 20:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Does OSM have landuse=orchard as well then? ShakespeareFan00 01:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

• Why not use both? landuse=vinyard for those who want it easier and landuse=agriculture produce=vine for those who want to tag it more detailed/more international. For me the better solution is that one with landuse=agriculture, because with that a renderer made by a person who lives in a country that have no focus on vine (and because of that don't renders the vineyard value) can display the vineyards as normal agriculture fields. But I can also understand the argument of more human friendly mapping. So this could be a good compromise. S.A.L. 12:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

• @S.A.L. Doing it both ways will result in similar approaches for all kinds of agricultural land use. Vineyards are special (@Myfanwy even in Australia, South-Africa, Chile or the U.S.A.) but I think this does not rectify the cluttering of the top level key space. If we would include presets in JOSM that result in tags like landuse=agriculture produce=vine and extend potlatch to also use similar kinds of presets we could have both: a simple, clean and extensible system for keys and values and an easy to use tagging mechanism that allows users to select Vineyard or Sheep meadow. Thus lets go for landuse=agriculture produce=vine and propose the respective changes to Potlatch and JOSM.--JND 20:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
  • That's a good solution I think. That way both, the machine and the human, can handle it in an easy way. S.A.L. 09:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

• There was a feature request for JOSM mappaint style, but that didn't mention some results of this discussion, that are important to me. Please add the parallel feature set
  • landuse=farm,produce=[grapes|vine]
  • landuse=farmland,produce=[grapes|vine] with farmland being a proposed feature
  • landuse=agriculture,produce=vine with agriculture being an even better (clear/logic/prospective) feature, that is not-yet-proposed, but only still seeking someone to actually propose it

Take care please. I'd like to see this sorted before I vote (positively) on this proposal myself. --Hasienda 03:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Current Situation

• I will now start using landuse=vineyard and have amended the Osmarender rules to support that (using OJW's grape drawing from above). OSM is for humans to work with, and I find the hierarchical approach unsuitable. This may have a certain appeal to computer scientists but the ordinary mapper we want to target cannot be bothered. And it is easy enough to convert landuse=vineyard to something else should this ever be desired.

Voting

• I approve this proposal --Cbm 19:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal --MatMac 01:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal --Dieterdreist 13:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal --Markobr 12:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)