Improving the data by checking the wiki page descriptions

Until now, there exists no natural=grassland on the ground in Germany, but there are 214k uses in OSM and the number are still rising, even after reporting it to the German community in December 2022.

It turned out, that some mappers found that it is a good replacement for the, at that time not existing landuse=grass, maybe because “grasslan” looked like “land/countryside with grass” in German and updated a few wiki pages, with usage recommandations, instead of the infarmation to use landuse=maedow.

A year ago I found out that some German mappers have found that shop=health_food is a good replacement for adding organic=yes to shops.

Yesterday I found species:de (412k uses; I already made some updates to the German wiki pages) and now also species:en (227k uses), which should be taxon:de and taxon:en. The examples on are right, beside the “taxon:”-prefix for genus and species. The background is, that the scientific name of a taxon=* in most time of the cases consists of the two parts genus=* and species=*. In biology related books it is also common to add the name of the first describer after them.

I’m sorry, but I’m struggling to understand what you’re actually asking / explaning.

Are you saying that this tag isn’t used in Germany? It seems to be used a lot?

1 Like

What you mean by

  1. The common name is taxon:de= not species:de=.
  2. “The {{tag|species}} can not be translated to German”
  3. description=The second part of the scientific name for a living or fossil organism in Latin.

As my understanding:

  1. taxon is more generic than species, so the species tag should be preferred if the specific species is known. This sound like some sort of deprecation of species:de in favour of taxon:de? Is there consensus about this?
  2. the species tag can be translated to German, species=Acer platanoides is species:de=Spitzahorn
  3. the species tag is not the second part of the scientific name (in the OSM database). We tag species=Acer platanoides, not species=platanoides. In this case we are talking about species:de though, and is strange that the wiki now says that the value should be “in Latin”. The value should be German, as the previous description correctly said (“The German scientific name”).
1 Like

I know at least one extremely active lu=grassland mapper down in Bavaria. Usually pretty high up in the German Top100 of hdyc

The wiki does not say that “species” has to be replaced by “taxon”. It only points out the the use of “taxon” (instead of “genus” or “species”) may avoid tagging mistakes

The use of taxon prevents the proliferation of various tags to describe biological components of mapped objects …

because it is a very generic term, applicable to every taxonomic level, whereas “genus” and “species” represent precisely 1 taxonomic level only and are often mixed up due to lack of botanical knowledge.



species=Quercus robur
species:en=Pendunculate oak

Key and value form a 1:1 relation, you cannot exchange them, whereas with the key taxon you can use any value you like which is therefore less prone to mistakes.

Even a cultivar form like the pyramide oak can be tagged as taxon:

taxon=Quercus robur Fastigiata

which is not possible by the use of “genus” and “species” only. You would have to go for

species=Quercus robur

From that point of view using “taxon” is a simple approach but nevertheless “genus” and “species” + all their namespace versions are valid tags.