[Tagging] Planned rendering changes of protected areas

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 3. Dec 2017, at 05:00, Daniel Koć <daniel at koć.pl> wrote:
> 
> 1. Discourage leisure=nature_reserve and make it a subtag of boundary=protected_area (if needed, otherwise just use a protect_class=7 or other class if known), like:
> 
>   - nature_reserve=yes - 2 uses
>   - protected_area=nature_reserve - 22 uses
>   - protected_area=nature - 61 uses
> 
> 2. Drop boundary=national_park, since it's easy to identify them all and they are equivalent for boundary=protected_area + protect_class=2 anyway.


I’m against both proposals (for the current situation, but with more changes to the whole system it might change), for 1 it was demonstrated that there are cases of nature reserves which aren’t protected areas according to osm tag definitions and for 2 I believe simple and self explanatory tagging is preferable over more complicated, not human readable, equally detailed alternative tagging 

cheers,
Martin