<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body><div style="font-family:Arial;"> </div>
<div style="font-family:Arial;">I don't recall that particular edit but I recall some edits of administrative boundaries, including national parks and state forests where I was trying to disentangle landcover from the administrative boundaries, but I tried to leave the landcover or natural=wood areas as closely as I could to what I had found. I agree that landuse=forest should be for commercial forest land use (including state forests) but should therefore not be used for national parks. If I've made any errors, please correct them - now and any other instance. Thanks. <br></div>
<div> </div>
<div style="font-family:Arial;"> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>On Mon, Jul 25, 2016, at 09:32 AM, Warin wrote:<br></div>
<blockquote type="cite"><pre><span style="font-family:menlo,consolas,"courier new",monospace" class="font">Hi,</span><br></pre><pre><span style="font-family:menlo,consolas,"courier new",monospace" class="font">
</span><br></pre><pre><span style="font-family:menlo,consolas,"courier new",monospace" class="font">I have noticed there are two relations with similar areas and both tagged landuse=forest.</span><br></pre><pre><span style="font-family:menlo,consolas,"courier new",monospace" class="font">Relation</span><span style="font-family:menlo,consolas,"courier new",monospace" class="font"> </span>5929494 created by down12under changeset 37053382 2/7/16 source given as 'aerial imagery', later edited by cleary and TheSwavu.
<br></pre><pre>Relation 5929493 created by down12under changeset 36918772 2/1/16 source given as 'aerial imagery', later edited by cleary.
<br></pre><pre><u>Amalgamation</u>
Looking closely .. for example way 396488797 is used in both relations! So as far as I can see these, in part, are duplicates.
<br></pre><pre>I think these should be amalgamated into one relation.<br></pre><pre>The outers of this relation should use the greater area of the two original relations.<br></pre><pre>The inners of this relation should use all inners of the two relations combining where required.
<br></pre><pre>Where there is doubt, bing imagery could be used to resolve and issues.
<br></pre><pre><u>Tags</u>
The source tag could be applied with "source=by down12under using 'aerial imagery later modifications using Bing imagery or as note on the individual way"?
<br></pre><pre>As the areas cover, in part, designated national park/s the tag could be changed to natural=wood as landuse=forest implies the commercial use of the forest (land use).
Aerial or satellite imagery only tells us land cover not land use so I think natural=wood is a better match.
<br></pre><pre><br></pre><pre><br></pre><div><u>_______________________________________________</u><br></div>
<div>Talk-au mailing list<br></div>
<div><a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br></div>
<div><a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br></div>
</blockquote><div style="font-family:Arial;"> </div>
</body>
</html>