<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
I would push back in the strongest possible terms against increasing the use of "invented" values of protect_class (anything outside of 1a, 1b, 2-6). The 1a,1b,2-6 values are based on IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) protected area categories, which categorize the management practices of land used for nature conservation. ...
However, the other values (1, 7-99) were pure inventions by early wiki authors and have absolutely no basis in any classification system, are poorly defined, and use numbers rather than plain-English words. .... replacing them with plain-English tagging for hazards, special economic zones, and military bases respectively. In those votes, there was very strong support for abandoning this invented numbering system.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div>
<div>The 'invented' tags were an inevitable consequence of selecting a classification system IUCN, which by its own description was very narrow in scope. <br></div><div dir="ltr">If 'inventing' a classification system isn't desirable, and adopting an external classification system like IUCN was acceptable, why not repurpose one that was actually designed from the ground up by an international community of stakeholders, including lawyers, scientists, planners, economists that's now been tested over a couple of decades, which addresses every semantic case of Land cover and Land Use that's been mentioned. <br></div><div dir="ltr">Or at a minimum, compare a proposed system to existing ones, on the off chance all those people may have thought through some difficulties and resolved them. One is the EU INSPIRE ( example <a href="https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/theme/am">https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/theme/am</a> and <a href="https://eurogeographics.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/2.-INSPIRE-Specification_Lena_0.pdf">https://eurogeographics.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/2.-INSPIRE-Specification_Lena_0.pdf</a> ), there are others. If you skim through these other models, it is fairly easy to understand why they divided the concepts the way they did, and how they build in extensions and room for more detail. </div> <br></div><br></div></div>