[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - boundary=forestry(_compartment) relations (Was "Feature Proposal - RFC - boundary=forest(_compartment) relations")

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 at 15:50, David Marchal via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> In such case, the forestry area would me mapped as a dedicated feature,
> separately of the surrounding protected area. The proposal includes an
> example tagging for such cases in US National Forests (
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boundary%3Dforestry(_compartment)_relations#US_National_Forest);
> is your example significantly different and in need of a dedicated tagging
> example?
>
> Pembrokeshire Coast National Park is not a national forest.  As I said, it
includes hamlets, villages and towns.  It also includes coastline (the
hint is in the name) and beaches.  There are even industrial areas
that are totally unconnected with forestry, trees or any kind of wood.
And it has some areas of managed forest within it.

This isn't a case of trees-within-trees, as your examples are.  It's
a case of a managed forest inside a protected area that is not
even close to being all trees.  There are other types of protected
area than woodland, and those protected area may have managed
forests within them.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210213/5d281769/attachment.htm>