[Talk-us-massachusetts] mass-trails.org - first version

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 10:06 PM, Jason Remillard
<remillard.jason at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi BIll,
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
> Malden and Boston are in now. Relations are 98% working now...

Very nice so far!

> The contribute page is still on my TODO.

I'm guessing the clickability of parks on the map -- which do act like
they'd click - is also on the Todo.


> We have tons of properties that are mapped as separate ways that should be
> combined into one large way or turned into a relation. In my code, two or
> more properties with the same name in the same town are merged together into
> a single page. It seems to work well.
> For example, stony brook reservation in Boston has 29 ways that were
> automatically combined into one page.

So you'll infer a missing relation, good for you ... and maybe your
code can log what might be added for discussion.

Zooming in on the discrepancies, the 0.0 Acres owned by City of
Melrose in the City of Malden is a corner of a pocket-park that
follows a lot boundary across the town line for maybe 80x20' or even
99x39' which would indeed round down to 0.0 Acres at fixed one
decimal.
And Rumney Marsh 0.0 Acres owned by DCR on Malden page for a feature
in Saugus, yes, the reservation includes greenspace with-in US 1 -
Lynn street interchange, again less than 2000sq.ft, so less than would
round up to 1/10th acre.

0.0 Acres still looks odd.  You might consider suppressing those since
not hikable -- and will be listed in adjacent town if actually hikable
as these are -- or shifting to Sq.Ft  when Acres rounds to 0.


> Also, another issue is what properties to show on the website.
>
> I am currently pulling in everything that matches the following. The goal is
> to show properties that you can walk on, and to support people interested in
> land conservation in the state.
>
> "landuse"="conservation"
> "landuse"="recreation_ground"
> "leisure"="recreation_ground"
> "leisure"="nature_reserve"
> "boundary"="national_park"
> "boundary"="protected_area"
>
> Does anybody have an feedback on those tags?

Mass. State Parks aren't necessarily tagged with those.
E.g., Hopkinton State Park http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/227955892
leisure="park", name="Hopkinton State Park", wikidata=Q1627677.
This is probably a defect in it's tagging, since it has hiking trails
and camping loops.

While Wompatuck SP and Ames Nowell SP are  "leisure"="nature_reserve"
&/or "landuse"="conservation".

Scanning for in-state, name contains "State Park," that do NOT meet
your criteria would give you a QA check for what you're missing.
Might require investigation to see if the tagging is wrong -- some
urban "State Parks" & "National Parks" may be validly historical &
recreation-free. (Urban NPS ones are often Historic Area/Monument not
Park but iirc not always.  While one can hike the Boston Freedom
Trail, it's probably just not what you're probably looking to
catalog.)

You might want to look at what has "owner"="The Trustees Of
Reservations" (and variant spellings of "The Trustees" as there are
multiple entities these days) to see if there are other tags in use.
E.g., Their Halibut Point Reservation has ownership="land_trust",
landuse="conservation", leisure="recreation_ground",
access="restricted".  Two trails starting from the adjacent Halibut Pt
St Pk cross or end in The Trustees' Reservation.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1849957#map=17/42.68981/-70.63249&layers=H