The mapnik symbol looks more like marsh/bog. Maybe a small bushy type symbol would be better?
scrub as way?
- Taginfo only knows about the 3 primitivy type (node, way and relation), in this case, a way can also be an area (when closed), and a relation can be an area (with the right tags and members). So nothing is wrong. --Sanderd17 (talk) 19:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
scrub for artificial shrubberies
- Yes, I've often wondered the same myself. Bunches of planted shrubs and trees in city areas are generally a problem from what I can see. If they are not in a park, then there seem to be no good tags for them. The present tags do not seem to be well matched to represent small, managed but relatively natural areas. Deuar (talk) 12:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- I'd saw emphatically NO! Not the same thing at all. Extending the meaning of a tag unfortunately means that all areas mapped with a specific meaning lose that and it has to be re-established by additional tags. Probably in the short-term use landuse=shrubbery (by analogy to landuse=flowerbed), but in practice we could do with a specific set of tags for specific features of gardens & parks based around a common key. SK53 (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Transition between mapping scrub to other land covers
Where is the change between an area of trees and a scrub area? With scattered trees in scrub I take the view of what has the most area covered, if it is trees then I map as trees, if scrub then map as scrub. I have the same view for scrub to heath. Warin61 (talk) 05:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Agreed. I believe most mappers determine the primary feature based on what type of vegetation covers the majority of the area. --Jeisenbe (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2019 (UTC)