[Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type
bradhaack at fastmail.com
Sat May 4 02:18:32 UTC 2019
I like this better than calling a state park a national park. Tagging
them state parks with the national park tag is an abstract concept that
will just result in confusion. If the consensus is to tag them the
same then I suggest depracting the national park tag and coming up with
something else so it isn't confusing.
On 4/29/19 8:51 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> I would recommend starting to use boundary=protected_area for State
> parks, and other parks that are large natural areas that are designed
> for a balance of tourism and protection of the natural environment but
> are not actually National Parks.
> You can tag state parks like this:
> boundary=protected_area + protect_class=2 + protection_title="State Park"
> Protect Class 2 is the same type as National Parks, and will be
> rendered and interpreted the same by most database users, but the
> protection title makes it clear that it's actually a State Park, not a
> National Park.
> For county parks: many of these are small parks that are similar to a
> usual urban park, with gardens, playgrounds, sports fields etc, and
> can be tagged with leisure=park. Others are natural areas or nature
> reserves, and could use boundary=protected_area + protect_class=5 +
> protection_title="County Park".
> State and National Forests, which are used for logging and grazing as
> well as recreation, can be tagged as:
> boundary=protected_area + protect_class=6 + protection_title="National
> Forest" or "State Forest".
> These features will all be rendered the same as boundary=national_park
> and leisure=nature_reserve in many renderings styles, but it's nice to
> be a little more specific.
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Talk-us