[Talk-us-massachusetts] landuse=conservation Re: TagInfo for Massachusetts

[Greg Troxel]

Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com> writes:

> Thank you!
>
>> MA unique non-rendering
>
> I see no issue with "non-rendering" because anyone could create a render
> that did render. And it would be interesting. (Doesn't belong on a basic
> road nav map of course, but might be interesting on a hiking or bike map as
> well as for research purposes.)

One could say the same about golf courses, which are of interest to only
a few :-)

Also, landuse=conservation renders in OsmAnd, and it might in the mkgmap
default.  We should be careful to say "does not render in the osmcarto
style used in the default map on osm.org" rather than "does not render".

> (And if the conservation land has (or should have) conservation status
> signage, it fits OSM "map the sign" rule even if it was a cadastral data
> import in origin.)

I think "map the sign" is overly strict.  Many things can be easily
verified by going to town offices and consulting official documents.

> "MA unique" should be a concern. Massachusetts legal status is interesting
> locally, but perhaps should morph to include 'MA_' in tag name and/or value
> to indicate it is a locally specific definition, and additionally use the
> worldwide OSM equivalent value for 'landuse=' so that a regional or
> national query doesn't show 0 acres in Mass?

It's not legal status; that's covered (sort of adequately, in a really
painful bureaucratic way) by boundary=protected_area.

landuse=conservation is a statement that the primary human purpose of
the land is to preserve it in a natural state.
As I understand it there is no approved landuse= tag that is appropriate
to such parcels.

If there were an osm-wide value for the landuse key *that means the same
thing*, I'd be fine with changing ours.

The problem is that the boundary=protected_area crowd think that it
covers all cases that matter, and that some form of government ownership
and protection is the only thing that matters.  This feels like it could
be "UN-colored glasses".

There could easily be  a town-owned parcel *in use* as conservation land
(the usual mostly natural, a few trails) but that does not have formal
status or a conservation restriction.   That's still
landuse=conservation, but it's not boundary=protected_area as I read it.