[Talk-us-massachusetts] non-local paid mappers deleting landuse=conservation

[Greg Troxel]

Jason Remillard <remillard.jason at gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> JOSM has added a warning for landuse=conservation, the tag really
> can't be maintained now, it is going to get removed over time. I don't
> agree with this, but I don't think we can fight it either.
>
> I am thinking about doing an automated edit to add
> boundary=protected_area to all the landuse=conservation  so that we
> don't lose them. However, I don't understand how protect_class=? would
> map to MA.

Well, the situation is unfortunate but your approach sounds reasonable.

I suppose you can have boundary=protected_area without a protect_class
if it's from a bare landuse=conservation tag, and people can deal later,
not so differently from how they'd add protect_class and
boundary=protected_area at the same time.

And then we can define that boundary=protected_area logically means
landuse=conservation, since it should always be possible to pick one of
N landuses, and throw a warning if boundary=protected_area and a
landuse!=conservation is simultaneously there.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 162 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us-massachusetts/attachments/20180321/581c2f67/attachment.sig>