[Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

[Mateusz Konieczny]

29 Apr 2019, 17:36 by kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com:

> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:24 AM Mateusz Konieczny
> <> matkoniecz at tutanota.com <mailto:matkoniecz at tutanota.com>> > wrote:
>
>> Why not simply call anything which is a 'large public area for recreation', a park, and specify it additionally with additional tags?
>>
>> That would require redefining leisure=park and while would match use of word "park" in USA
>> it would start mismatching use of work "park" in UK. It would also start to mismatch how
>> leisure=park is used in Europe.
>>
>> Generally British English is preferred in OSM and redefining popular tags is deeply problematic.
>>
>
> Are we talking about the use of the *tag*, or the use of the *word* in
> British English?
>
It is supposed to be about both, I attempted to check both but I open to discovering that I am mistaken.
In case of British English I attempted to consult with people who are native speakers of BE 
and people better in English than myself but maybe my questions/examples failed to capture
cases of what should be described park (and or leisure=park).

I know that it is possible, that is part of the reason why I posted quoted message (it would be embarassing
to discover that my claims were wrong but I prefer to discover as soon as possible).

> If we're talking about the use of the word 'park' in common speech,
> the British Isles have ample examples of 'park' being used in a sense
> much like the US one: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/359617831 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/359617831>
> happened to be the first one I noticed, but
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/421685070 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/421685070>>  and others are also
> present. If these aren't 'parks' in UK English, why do they exist in
> the UK with 'park' in their names?
>
Neither of them is tagged leisure=park and it seems that
"national park" is in some way similar to "business park" or "industrial park"
- word park is in the name but it is not considered as a special case
of "green human-sculpted landscape" that is commonly referred to as
a "park".

Note that I may be mistaken here, my check was quick sanity check of
a biased group of people not some scientific research

> I also notice that Great Britain has similar situations to the US
> national parks, where other land uses are embedded. I see that
> Cairngorms National Park
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1947603 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1947603>>  embeds at least four
> villages (Avlemore, Ballater, Grantown-on-Spey and Kingussie).
>
This one is not surprising to me, it is probably result of compromise/conflict
resulting in potected area with some objects that are contrary to any 
nature protection attempts.
Poland has cases of legal large-scale active logging in Tatra mountains 
that is result of conflict between local people and desire to protect nature.

See https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wsp%C3%B3lnota_Le%C5%9Bna_Uprawnionych_O%C5%9Bmiu_Wsi <https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wsp%C3%B3lnota_Le%C5%9Bna_Uprawnionych_O%C5%9Bmiu_Wsi>
- conflict dates back to creation of the Tatrzański Park Narodowy (=Tatra National Park).

See also motorways going sometimes through protected or "protected" areas.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20190429/ceaa42f9/attachment.html>