[Talk-us-massachusetts] Fwd: landuse=conservation

[Jim Snyder-Grant]

Here's another pair of interesting examples: adjacent parts of the Great
Meadows national wildlife area, one visible in OSM, the other not.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29883102 has
landuse <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse?uselang=en-US>
conservation
leisure <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:leisure?uselang=en-US>
nature_reserve
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=nature%20reserve?uselang=en-US>
 but right next to it is the Concord unit,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5205256 with the more modern tagging
of
boundary <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:boundary?uselang=en-US>
protected_area
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=protected%20area?uselang=en-US>
It has no landuse tag or leisure tag, and is invisible in OSM's default
viewer.

So, in Acton, we'll be sure to keep using leisure tags for our conservation
lands, and hope that if we ever have conservation lands that allow no
access, there will be a way to get these shown in the default OSM viewer.

Jim Snyder-Grant
18 Half Moon Hill
Acton MA 01720
508 572-2985


On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Jim Snyder-Grant <
jim.snyder.grant at gmail.com> wrote:

> There's an example in Acton: land owned by Concord near Nagog pond.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/311895579
> It has no 'leisure' tag (it's off limits to most humans). It can be
> selected and edited, but it doesn't show up in the default OSM view.  It
> does show up in other renderers, for example, http://hikebikemap.org
> shows it, and the 'outdoor' style of mapbox.  And it DOES have
> landuse=conservation, so having that doesn't guarantee that it will show up
> any more in OSM.
>
> The acton arboretum has leisure=park and the other conservation lands in
> Acton have leisure=nature_reserve
>
>
>
> Jim Snyder-Grant
> 18 Half Moon Hill
> Acton MA 01720
> 508 572-2985 <(508)%20572-2985>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Greg Troxel <gdt at lexort.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Jim Snyder-Grant <jim.snyder.grant at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > The two of us working on Acton conservation land mapping a lot these
>> days
>> > are willing to make the change to boundary=protected_area in Acton.
>> > We are thinking  protect_class=5 seems to fit best for our conservation
>> > lands, but this is open for consideration.
>>
>> If you are doing manual mapping, I think you can just go ahead and do
>> whatever you think best and not worry about it too much, but it's of
>> course nice to ask for opinions as you just did.  You don't have the
>> duty of care that an automated edit has, and Acton doesn't have so many
>> areas that changing the tags is really hard (an hour or so?).
>>
>> I wonder if you have any areas where leisure=nature_reserve does not
>> apply (Arboretum, arguably) and another leisure= tag also does not apply
>> (?).   I would be curious to see what happens rendering-wise to an area
>> with boundary=protected_area and no leisure=.
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us-massachusetts/attachments/20170116/3639bc1f/attachment-0001.html>