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

[David Marchal]

OK, I clarified it in the proposal (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boundary%3Dforestry(_compartment)_relations#Forestry_areas_and_protected_areas).

Regards.

Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Le dimanche, 14. février 2021 20:44, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> a écrit :

> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 at 16:35, David Marchal via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> I left it out of the proposal because, in my mind, it's general tagging: if a feature is in an area with special rules, but is not subject to these rules, it is an enclave in it and should be tagged accordingly. Is it OK to you? Do you think it should be specified in the proposal?
>
> I think some clarification is required. Otherwise I'm left wondering why an
> enclave makes one particular example special. And if ten different people
> are left to their own devices to figure out what you meant, you'll get
> eleven different interpretations.
>
> --
> Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210215/a29a362b/attachment-0001.htm>