vine row tagging

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

vine row tagging

John Bryant
Hi all, I'm doing some work with a community agriculture group looking at adding vineyard-related features to OSM, at this point starting with just vine rows.

Vineyards themselves (ie. the polygons that contain the rows) are often tagged with landuse=vineyard and crop=grape [1][2].

I can't see anything relevant to this in the Australian tagging guidelines. Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row, denotation=agricultural, and crop=grape, but not totally confident about this.

Does anyone here have any thoughts or suggestions?

Thanks
John

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvineyard
[2] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=vineyard#combinations

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

Graeme Fitzpatrick



On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

Do you need to?

I think it could be automatically assumed that all vineyards have their vines in rows, approx the same distance apart?

I noticed vine_row_orientation=* : vine row orientation (in degrees)on the wiki page - wouldn't that be sufficient?

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row,

If you were going to put a tree_row on every row of vines, you'd have nothing but a solid mass of them! 

denotation=agricultural,

Sorry, not sure what you mean with this?

and crop=grape,

Marked as being redundant as all vineyards grow grapes! :-)

Thanks

Graeme


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

vine row tagging

Nevw
Many vineyards have numbered rows with a tag on the end strainer posts to assist direction of workers, etc.
These could be numbered using the addr interpolation scheme and then individual rows would not need to be mapped but does need a close survey.

On 15 Oct 2020, at 3:32 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:




On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

Do you need to?

I think it could be automatically assumed that all vineyards have their vines in rows, approx the same distance apart?

I noticed vine_row_orientation=* : vine row orientation (in degrees)on the wiki page - wouldn't that be sufficient?

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row,

If you were going to put a tree_row on every row of vines, you'd have nothing but a solid mass of them! 

denotation=agricultural,

Sorry, not sure what you mean with this?

and crop=grape,

Marked as being redundant as all vineyards grow grapes! :-)

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

John Bryant
In reply to this post by Graeme Fitzpatrick
Thanks Graeme, I appreciate your response, answers to your questions below.

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 13:32, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Do you need to?
Well, they want to map rows, to use OSM in a way that will be useful to the viticulture community. The idea is to add more detail to vineyards than is currently in OSM, which has vineyard areas but not rows.
 
I think it could be automatically assumed that all vineyards have their vines in rows, approx the same distance apart?
To some degree, but for viticulture people it would be useful to use *actual* rather than assumed locations.
 
I noticed vine_row_orientation=* : vine row orientation (in degrees)on the wiki page - wouldn't that be sufficient?
That seems good for vineyard areas, but isn't needed for rows, which is what we're trying to figure out tagging for.
 
For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row,
If you were going to put a tree_row on every row of vines, you'd have nothing but a solid mass of them! 
Referring to the OSM carto rendering? That's a good point. What else could we use to describe a vine row?
 
denotation=agricultural,
Sorry, not sure what you mean with this?
This was a suggestion that came to us, it's relatively commonly used for trees and tree rows, but I'm not sure if it makes sense for vine rows, which is why I'm asking :)

and crop=grape,
Marked as being redundant as all vineyards grow grapes! :-)
Yes I agree for vineyards. But specifically thinking about vine rows for this tagging.

I guess these comments raise the question, do features like vine rows belong in OSM? Does the difficulty in finding a tagging schema for vine rows point to an incompatible feature type? I had assumed that because they're readily observable on the ground, and relatively persistent, it would make sense to map them... but if there's a reason they shouldn't be in OSM it would be good to know, so the folks I'm helping can change course.

Cheers
John

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

John Bryant
In reply to this post by Nevw
So, map the strainer posts on the ends of the rows, rather than the rows themselves, and then the end user could use them to interpolate the row? That's an interesting idea.

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:33, nwastra <[hidden email]> wrote:
Many vineyards have numbered rows with a tag on the end strainer posts to assist direction of workers, etc.
These could be numbered using the addr interpolation scheme and then individual rows would not need to be mapped but does need a close survey.

On 15 Oct 2020, at 3:32 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:




On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

Do you need to?

I think it could be automatically assumed that all vineyards have their vines in rows, approx the same distance apart?

I noticed vine_row_orientation=* : vine row orientation (in degrees)on the wiki page - wouldn't that be sufficient?

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row,

If you were going to put a tree_row on every row of vines, you'd have nothing but a solid mass of them! 

denotation=agricultural,

Sorry, not sure what you mean with this?

and crop=grape,

Marked as being redundant as all vineyards grow grapes! :-)

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

adam steer
Hey John

What are the owners of the properties containing vines saying? Are they fully aware that their farm data will be open for everyone to see?

...and what data/tagging useful to them?

Cheers,
Adam

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 08:40, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
So, map the strainer posts on the ends of the rows, rather than the rows themselves, and then the end user could use them to interpolate the row? That's an interesting idea.

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:33, nwastra <[hidden email]> wrote:
Many vineyards have numbered rows with a tag on the end strainer posts to assist direction of workers, etc.
These could be numbered using the addr interpolation scheme and then individual rows would not need to be mapped but does need a close survey.

On 15 Oct 2020, at 3:32 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:




On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

Do you need to?

I think it could be automatically assumed that all vineyards have their vines in rows, approx the same distance apart?

I noticed vine_row_orientation=* : vine row orientation (in degrees)on the wiki page - wouldn't that be sufficient?

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row,

If you were going to put a tree_row on every row of vines, you'd have nothing but a solid mass of them! 

denotation=agricultural,

Sorry, not sure what you mean with this?

and crop=grape,

Marked as being redundant as all vineyards grow grapes! :-)

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

Bren Barnes
Depends of level of detail sought, but each grapevine could be marked as natural=shrub.

My first thought was to use barrier=fence, but the wiki defines it as a "freestanding structure designed to restrict or prevent movement across a boundary".

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 17:46, Adam Steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey John

What are the owners of the properties containing vines saying? Are they fully aware that their farm data will be open for everyone to see?

...and what data/tagging useful to them?

Cheers,
Adam

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 08:40, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
So, map the strainer posts on the ends of the rows, rather than the rows themselves, and then the end user could use them to interpolate the row? That's an interesting idea.

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:33, nwastra <[hidden email]> wrote:
Many vineyards have numbered rows with a tag on the end strainer posts to assist direction of workers, etc.
These could be numbered using the addr interpolation scheme and then individual rows would not need to be mapped but does need a close survey.

On 15 Oct 2020, at 3:32 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:




On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

Do you need to?

I think it could be automatically assumed that all vineyards have their vines in rows, approx the same distance apart?

I noticed vine_row_orientation=* : vine row orientation (in degrees)on the wiki page - wouldn't that be sufficient?

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row,

If you were going to put a tree_row on every row of vines, you'd have nothing but a solid mass of them! 

denotation=agricultural,

Sorry, not sure what you mean with this?

and crop=grape,

Marked as being redundant as all vineyards grow grapes! :-)

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

John Bryant
In reply to this post by adam steer
Thanks Adam,

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:44, Adam Steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
What are the owners of the properties containing vines saying? Are they fully aware that their farm data will be open for everyone to see?
This is part of a viticulture community-driven project to build consensus around use & sharing of data, and part of the discussion is around data ownership and openness. The project has the Australian Farm Data Code [1] as one of its guiding principles, so it's definitely on the radar. I'm not running the project myself, but helping to answer some of the questions about open geospatial (hence this query!).
 
...and what data/tagging useful to them?
Re: data, starting with vine rows as a first step, but possibly farm tracks, fences, and other infrastructure might be useful later, of course depending on its suitability for OSM.
Re: tags, I think the viticulture community is pretty non-fussed about what specific tags are used, as long as they can use OSM and do the right thing by the OSM community.

Cheers
John


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

John Bryant
In reply to this post by Bren Barnes
Thanks Brendan, this is an interesting idea! There's definitely some interest in capturing data at the vine level, but it presents some complications for some in the viticulture community, so vine rows are seen as a suitable level of abstraction for this stage.

barrier=fence... also interesting... made up of vines on wires running between posts, the typical vine row is quite fence-like.

Thanks
John


On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:49, Brendan Barnes <[hidden email]> wrote:
Depends of level of detail sought, but each grapevine could be marked as natural=shrub.

My first thought was to use barrier=fence, but the wiki defines it as a "freestanding structure designed to restrict or prevent movement across a boundary".

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 17:46, Adam Steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey John

What are the owners of the properties containing vines saying? Are they fully aware that their farm data will be open for everyone to see?

...and what data/tagging useful to them?

Cheers,
Adam

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 08:40, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
So, map the strainer posts on the ends of the rows, rather than the rows themselves, and then the end user could use them to interpolate the row? That's an interesting idea.

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:33, nwastra <[hidden email]> wrote:
Many vineyards have numbered rows with a tag on the end strainer posts to assist direction of workers, etc.
These could be numbered using the addr interpolation scheme and then individual rows would not need to be mapped but does need a close survey.

On 15 Oct 2020, at 3:32 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:




On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 14:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

Do you need to?

I think it could be automatically assumed that all vineyards have their vines in rows, approx the same distance apart?

I noticed vine_row_orientation=* : vine row orientation (in degrees)on the wiki page - wouldn't that be sufficient?

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row,

If you were going to put a tree_row on every row of vines, you'd have nothing but a solid mass of them! 

denotation=agricultural,

Sorry, not sure what you mean with this?

and crop=grape,

Marked as being redundant as all vineyards grow grapes! :-)

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

Simon Slater
In reply to this post by John Bryant
On Thursday, 15 October 2020 6:23:36 PM AEDT John Bryant wrote:
> This is part of a viticulture community-driven project to build consensus
> around use & sharing of data, and part of the discussion is around data
> ownership and openness. The project has the Australian Farm Data Code [1]
> as one of its guiding principles, so it's definitely on the radar. I'm not
> running the project myself, but helping to answer some of the questions
> about open geospatial (hence this query!).

For this level of detail, would a GIS be more useful, pulling roads etc. from
OSM?  Then other things useful to the viticulturist, such as soil type, slope,
aspect, rainfall, irrigation and drainage (natural or artificial) even
cadastre for individual blocks, could be layered in as needed and is as much,
or as little, detail as required.

GRASS or QGIS are readily available as FOSS if that is a requirement.

--
Regards
Simon Slater

Registered Linux User #463789 @ http://linuxcounter.net

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

John Bryant
Thanks Simon, putting the data into OSM isn't meant to replace GIS, all the things you mention are certainly part of the professional viticulture community's practice. I believe this idea is more around enabling a different kind of access to information, and exploring the possibilities of using an open platform to enable it.

Cheers
John

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 15:58, Simon Slater <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thursday, 15 October 2020 6:23:36 PM AEDT John Bryant wrote:
> This is part of a viticulture community-driven project to build consensus
> around use & sharing of data, and part of the discussion is around data
> ownership and openness. The project has the Australian Farm Data Code [1]
> as one of its guiding principles, so it's definitely on the radar. I'm not
> running the project myself, but helping to answer some of the questions
> about open geospatial (hence this query!).

For this level of detail, would a GIS be more useful, pulling roads etc. from
OSM?  Then other things useful to the viticulturist, such as soil type, slope,
aspect, rainfall, irrigation and drainage (natural or artificial) even
cadastre for individual blocks, could be layered in as needed and is as much,
or as little, detail as required.

GRASS or QGIS are readily available as FOSS if that is a requirement.

--
Regards
Simon Slater

Registered Linux User #463789 @ http://linuxcounter.net

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

Andrew Harvey-3
In reply to this post by John Bryant
I think it's fine to map these in OSM, like all other things in private property it does make it harder to validate and determining the exact crop from imagery might be a stretch, but I don't think this is enough of a reason to not map.

I agree with the suggestion of natural=tree_row + denotation=agricultural + crop=grape is best. These are all well documented and in-use tags and this use matches the description of what they are for.

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 15:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all, I'm doing some work with a community agriculture group looking at adding vineyard-related features to OSM, at this point starting with just vine rows.

Vineyards themselves (ie. the polygons that contain the rows) are often tagged with landuse=vineyard and crop=grape [1][2].

I can't see anything relevant to this in the Australian tagging guidelines. Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row, denotation=agricultural, and crop=grape, but not totally confident about this.

Does anyone here have any thoughts or suggestions?

Thanks
John

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvineyard
[2] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=vineyard#combinations
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

Phil Wyatt

Hi Folks,

 

Where does the denotation=agricultural come from as it doesn’t appear to be a regular combination with crop=grape ??

 

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/crop=grape#combinations

 

Cheers Phil

 

 

From: Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, 15 October 2020 7:52 PM
To: John Bryant <[hidden email]>
Cc: talk-au <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] vine row tagging

 

I think it's fine to map these in OSM, like all other things in private property it does make it harder to validate and determining the exact crop from imagery might be a stretch, but I don't think this is enough of a reason to not map.

 

I agree with the suggestion of natural=tree_row + denotation=agricultural + crop=grape is best. These are all well documented and in-use tags and this use matches the description of what they are for.

 

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 15:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all, I'm doing some work with a community agriculture group looking at adding vineyard-related features to OSM, at this point starting with just vine rows.

Vineyards themselves (ie. the polygons that contain the rows) are often tagged with landuse=vineyard and crop=grape [1][2].

I can't see anything relevant to this in the Australian tagging guidelines. Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row, denotation=agricultural, and crop=grape, but not totally confident about this.

Does anyone here have any thoughts or suggestions?

Thanks
John

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvineyard
[2] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=vineyard#combinations

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd: vine row tagging

Graeme Fitzpatrick
In reply to this post by John Bryant
Resending message to the list :-(

How do we fix it so that "Reply" goes to the list, not just the last poster?

Thanks

Graeme


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 17:20
Subject: Re: [talk-au] vine row tagging
To: John Bryant <[hidden email]>





On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 16:34, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:

Well, they want to map rows, to use OSM in a way that will be useful to the viticulture community. The idea is to add more detail to vineyards than is currently in OSM, which has vineyard areas but not rows.
 
To some degree, but for viticulture people it would be useful to use *actual* rather than assumed locations.

Fair enough.

Referring to the OSM carto rendering? That's a good point. What else could we use to describe a vine row?

As Brendan mentioned, mark them in as fences, which will show a nice straight line, although that could be called tagging for the renderer! :-) It wouldn't be altogether wrong though, as they do form a barrier to movement across the rows!

do features like vine rows belong in OSM? Does the difficulty in finding a tagging schema for vine rows point to an incompatible feature type? I had assumed that because they're readily observable on the ground, and relatively persistent, it would make sense to map them... but if there's a reason they shouldn't be in OSM it would be good to know, so the folks I'm helping can change course.

I guess that's a question of what do the end-users want to see about "their" land? Most would probably be happy just to see it as a vineyard, but if somebody wants extra detail, is it up to us to say "No"? I wouldn't have said so, myself!

Thanks

Graeme


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: vine row tagging

Little Maps
That’s an interesting development in OSM micro-mapping John. Can I put a vote in for using natural=tree_row rather than barrier=fence, if no better options are available. I’m not arguing from the point of rendering, but from the perspective of developing a tagging scheme that will be useful in other orchards and even perhaps timber plantations, if future mappers extend this process. Most (all?) orchards and plantations have woody plants in rows, but only a few have fence-like trellises. Natural=tree_row would be suitable for a wide range of orchards and plantations whereas barrier=fence is much more restricted. It would be a pain if the almond plantations and citrus orchards in a region used one tagging scheme while the nearby vineyards used a different one. I’m certainly glad I don’t have to map them all! Best wishes Ian

On 16 Oct 2020, at 8:37 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:


Resending message to the list :-(

How do we fix it so that "Reply" goes to the list, not just the last poster?

Thanks

Graeme


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 17:20
Subject: Re: [talk-au] vine row tagging
To: John Bryant <[hidden email]>





On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 16:34, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:

Well, they want to map rows, to use OSM in a way that will be useful to the viticulture community. The idea is to add more detail to vineyards than is currently in OSM, which has vineyard areas but not rows.
 
To some degree, but for viticulture people it would be useful to use *actual* rather than assumed locations.

Fair enough.

Referring to the OSM carto rendering? That's a good point. What else could we use to describe a vine row?

As Brendan mentioned, mark them in as fences, which will show a nice straight line, although that could be called tagging for the renderer! :-) It wouldn't be altogether wrong though, as they do form a barrier to movement across the rows!

do features like vine rows belong in OSM? Does the difficulty in finding a tagging schema for vine rows point to an incompatible feature type? I had assumed that because they're readily observable on the ground, and relatively persistent, it would make sense to map them... but if there's a reason they shouldn't be in OSM it would be good to know, so the folks I'm helping can change course.

I guess that's a question of what do the end-users want to see about "their" land? Most would probably be happy just to see it as a vineyard, but if somebody wants extra detail, is it up to us to say "No"? I wouldn't have said so, myself!

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: vine row tagging

Benjamin Ceravolo
I understand the principal being explained above as to why Vire rows are wanting to be mapped, but my question is is it even practical within the use of the map considering that viren reos are approximately 1.5m apart and all but the most high end GNSS (GPS) units are +1m accuracy. My point being that I (from a map usage standpoint) don't see how the mapping of vine rows would be useful to farmers, if anything they want to mark any data, while out in the Vineyard would ether be potentially inaccurate or be have to be mapped on paper which I think defeats the purpose of mapping it on OSM. 

Thanks, Ben.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: vine row tagging

John Bryant
In reply to this post by Phil Wyatt
Thanks Phil, there's a brief note about denotation=* in combination with natural=tree (and by extension, natural=tree_row?) on the wiki [1]. Combining with crop=grape seems to be a new approach...


On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 17:11, Phil Wyatt <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Folks,

 

Where does the denotation=agricultural come from as it doesn’t appear to be a regular combination with crop=grape ??

 

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/crop=grape#combinations

 

Cheers Phil

 

 

From: Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, 15 October 2020 7:52 PM
To: John Bryant <[hidden email]>
Cc: talk-au <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] vine row tagging

 

I think it's fine to map these in OSM, like all other things in private property it does make it harder to validate and determining the exact crop from imagery might be a stretch, but I don't think this is enough of a reason to not map.

 

I agree with the suggestion of natural=tree_row + denotation=agricultural + crop=grape is best. These are all well documented and in-use tags and this use matches the description of what they are for.

 

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 15:13, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all, I'm doing some work with a community agriculture group looking at adding vineyard-related features to OSM, at this point starting with just vine rows.

Vineyards themselves (ie. the polygons that contain the rows) are often tagged with landuse=vineyard and crop=grape [1][2].

I can't see anything relevant to this in the Australian tagging guidelines. Looking more broadly, it looks like vine rows haven't been widely mapped before.

For vine *rows* (ie. the linear features within the vineyard), we've had suggestions of natural=tree_row, denotation=agricultural, and crop=grape, but not totally confident about this.

Does anyone here have any thoughts or suggestions?

Thanks
John

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvineyard
[2] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=vineyard#combinations

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: vine row tagging

John Bryant
In reply to this post by Little Maps
Thanks Ian, that's a very good point re: consistency with orchards & plantations. Whether this style of mapping will actually prove to be broadly useful, time will tell I suppose, but seems better to start off aiming for consistency.

On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 at 06:41, Little Maps <[hidden email]> wrote:
That’s an interesting development in OSM micro-mapping John. Can I put a vote in for using natural=tree_row rather than barrier=fence, if no better options are available. I’m not arguing from the point of rendering, but from the perspective of developing a tagging scheme that will be useful in other orchards and even perhaps timber plantations, if future mappers extend this process. Most (all?) orchards and plantations have woody plants in rows, but only a few have fence-like trellises. Natural=tree_row would be suitable for a wide range of orchards and plantations whereas barrier=fence is much more restricted. It would be a pain if the almond plantations and citrus orchards in a region used one tagging scheme while the nearby vineyards used a different one. I’m certainly glad I don’t have to map them all! Best wishes Ian

On 16 Oct 2020, at 8:37 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:


Resending message to the list :-(

How do we fix it so that "Reply" goes to the list, not just the last poster?

Thanks

Graeme


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 17:20
Subject: Re: [talk-au] vine row tagging
To: John Bryant <[hidden email]>





On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 16:34, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:

Well, they want to map rows, to use OSM in a way that will be useful to the viticulture community. The idea is to add more detail to vineyards than is currently in OSM, which has vineyard areas but not rows.
 
To some degree, but for viticulture people it would be useful to use *actual* rather than assumed locations.

Fair enough.

Referring to the OSM carto rendering? That's a good point. What else could we use to describe a vine row?

As Brendan mentioned, mark them in as fences, which will show a nice straight line, although that could be called tagging for the renderer! :-) It wouldn't be altogether wrong though, as they do form a barrier to movement across the rows!

do features like vine rows belong in OSM? Does the difficulty in finding a tagging schema for vine rows point to an incompatible feature type? I had assumed that because they're readily observable on the ground, and relatively persistent, it would make sense to map them... but if there's a reason they shouldn't be in OSM it would be good to know, so the folks I'm helping can change course.

I guess that's a question of what do the end-users want to see about "their" land? Most would probably be happy just to see it as a vineyard, but if somebody wants extra detail, is it up to us to say "No"? I wouldn't have said so, myself!

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: vine row tagging

Andrew Harvey-3
In reply to this post by Benjamin Ceravolo


On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 at 13:54, Benjamin Ceravolo <[hidden email]> wrote:
I understand the principal being explained above as to why Vire rows are wanting to be mapped, but my question is is it even practical within the use of the map considering that viren reos are approximately 1.5m apart and all but the most high end GNSS (GPS) units are +1m accuracy. My point being that I (from a map usage standpoint) don't see how the mapping of vine rows would be useful to farmers, if anything they want to mark any data, while out in the Vineyard would ether be potentially inaccurate or be have to be mapped on paper which I think defeats the purpose of mapping it on OSM. 

Paths in cemeteries are also very close together, but with aerial imagery it's possible to map out with this detail (even if the whole thing is shifted that's okay and never going to be perfect anyway.  

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: vine row tagging

John Bryant
In reply to this post by Benjamin Ceravolo
Thanks Ben,

That's a good point re: accuracy. But absolute position within a few meters may be OK, if the relative position is maintained. Vine rows are generally visible on imagery and could be mapped that way. It's also not unusual for a vineyard to survey their rows with high accuracy GPS.

About usefulness to farmers... this mapping initiative is coming from the viticulture community, so I have to assume they have reasons to find it useful.  If those reasons are compelling enough, they'll probably be the ones doing much of the mapping... and if in the end it doesn't prove to be useful then it probably won't go very far.

Cheers
John

On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 at 10:54, Benjamin Ceravolo <[hidden email]> wrote:
I understand the principal being explained above as to why Vire rows are wanting to be mapped, but my question is is it even practical within the use of the map considering that viren reos are approximately 1.5m apart and all but the most high end GNSS (GPS) units are +1m accuracy. My point being that I (from a map usage standpoint) don't see how the mapping of vine rows would be useful to farmers, if anything they want to mark any data, while out in the Vineyard would ether be potentially inaccurate or be have to be mapped on paper which I think defeats the purpose of mapping it on OSM. 

Thanks, Ben.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
12