<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 19/01/19 18:42, nwastra wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DEC00F0C-287F-4FE0-8C97-E9E2F62036C4@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
On the OSM Forum > Rendering maps OpenStreetMap Carto (default
map on <a href="http://OSM.org" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">OSM.org</a>)
kokio mentioned that are discussing currently what features are
missing on the map outside the Europe and in rural places.
<div class="">I thought this might be an opportunity for us to
raise anything you think is relevant from an Australian
perspective. </div>
<div class=""> <br class="">
<div class=""><a
href="https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=734662#p734662"
class="" moz-do-not-send="true">https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=734662#p734662</a></div>
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I don't like state forests (landuse=forest) coved with the
natural=wood as well. <br>
Not all the state forest will be tree covered, and from time to time
it will be harvested. <br>
If the natural=wood tagging is removed from the land=use=forest will
that then give you some rendering? <br>
<br>
The national parks look to be rendered - through the tree areas.
Problems arise when the national park boundary goes over to another
national park. <br>
<br>
--------------<br>
Personally Id render landuse=forest as a tree with an axe through
it, just to distinguish it from natural=wood. <br>
===============<br>
I think they are going to render ridges soon, which will be good. <br>
</body>
</html>