<html>
<body>
Folks,<br><br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>This whole
discussion going back more than a year ago has <br>
been dominated by very European concepts of what is a forest.<br>
I live in the dry, high western United States, where forests are <br>
very different from those in Europe (not leafy!) but are no less<br>
forests. How would you tag the pinon-juniper forests all over the <br>
Southwest, where no trees are taller than 15 feet? Or the chapparal <br>
of Southern California or the Jashua Tree stands of the <br>
California desert or the Great Sage Plain with sage 10 feet tall?<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>And,
Christoph, the forests are divided into subunits because<br>
that's how they are administered and because many national forests <br>
are made up of physically separate subunits. They can be as much as <br>
100 miles apart. For example, the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest <br>
has five such units. If you want information or a permit, you have to
<br>
go to the local subunit. So, no, they should not be combined into one
<br>
multipolygon, because, in reality, they are not a single
multipolygon.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>So, while
mapping principles are important, so are the physical, <br>
natural and administrative realities of a place.<br><br>
Charlotte<br><br>
<br>
At 08:14 AM 8/17/2015, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On Monday 17 August 2015,
Martijn van Exel wrote: <br>
> I removed the landuse=forest from the national forest relations in
<br>
> Utah: <br>
<a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33392465" eudora="autourl">
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33392465</a>. <br>
<br>
To find further occurances you can use: <br>
<a href="http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/aZs" eudora="autourl">
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/aZs</a> <br>
You will also see there that many national forests are mapped as <br>
multiple separate areas each with tags and the same name - like <br>
<a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2658152" eudora="autourl">
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2658152</a>
<a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30268500" eudora="autourl">
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30268500</a>
<a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30268493" eudora="autourl">
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30268493</a> <br>
It would be a good idea to consolidate those into one multipolygon <br>
relation so someone searching for a national forest, for example, <br>
will find the whole forest and not only the largest subarea. <br>
<br>
> The map will look very white :( but at least it's not wrong anymore.
<br>
It will also encourage mapping of actual forested areas as well as <br>
other vegetation and natural features. <br>
<br>
-- Christoph Hormann<br>
<a href="http://www.imagico.de">http://www.imagico.de</a><br>
_______________________________________________ <br>
Talk-us mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>
<br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" eudora="autourl">
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
Charlotte Wolter<br>
927 18th Street Suite A<br>
Santa Monica, California<br>
90403<br>
+1-310-597-4040<br>
techlady@techlady.com<br>
Skype: thetechlady<br><br>
</body>
</html>