<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><DIV>On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Theodore Book <<A href="mailto:tbook@libero.it" ymailto="mailto:tbook@libero.it">tbook@libero.it</A>> wrote:<BR>>> Despite my taking a "local" approach, I do think it would be great if we<BR>>> could do a coordinated national upload of the NHD data, however.<BR><BR>>I think it would definitely help make the US OpenStreetMap look more<BR>>professional to get as much of the NHD data in as possible.<BR><BR>>> I am also looking at the GIS data from the Chattahoochee-Oconee National<BR>>> Forests, and was wondering if we had come to a consensus on National<BR>>> Forest boundaries - should they simply be tagged "landuse=forest", or is<BR>>> some other tag ("natural=wood", or "boundary=national_park")
preferred?<BR>>> Or do people think that it is better not to tag National Forest<BR>>> boundaries at all?<BR><BR>>I think they're worth including; most U.S. commercial maps show<BR>>national forest boundaries; landuse=forest seems to be the appropriate<BR>>tag to use.<BR><BR><BR>>Chris</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>others have been using the tags leisure = nature_reserve boundary = national_park <BR><BR><BR>------------------------------<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Talk-us mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org" ymailto="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</A><BR><A href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" target=_blank>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</A><BR><BR><BR>End of Talk-us Digest, Vol 15, Issue 20<BR>***************************************<BR></DIV></div></body></html>