[Talk-us] Washington, DC parks - boundary=national_park or not?

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 23:37 2021-04-28, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us đã viết:
> Nearly real example:
> In Poland developers call nearly all new housing under names
> "Something Park"
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/492570920 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/492570920>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/492570920 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/492570920>
> 
> I never heard about "National Park", but lets say that it exists.
> Is it taggable as boundary=national_park?
> 
> Fictional example:
> 
> in Farawaystan military calls important military bases "National parks"
> Is it taggable as boundary=national_park?
> 
> I would say no, and would use boundary=national_park for protected 
> natural wild areas.
> 
> Similarly restaurant calling itself "Supermassive dam" would not be 
> tagged waterway=dam
> (fictional example).
> 
> Restaurant called "Mysterious Garden" ( 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/492570920 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/492570920> )
> is not taggable as leisure=garden based on it name.

This feels like a strawman argument; I think the other mappers on this 
list are quite familiar with "Park" occurring in the names of non-parks. 
(Around me, that would include Apple Park and Menlo Park, both of which 
are heavily wooded, but which are tagged office=it and place=town, 
respectively.) What we're discussing are parks that are considered 
national parks in some respects but maybe not a good fit for the 
boundary=national_park tag specifically.

If we're looking for gray area, then Cuyahoga Valley National Park near 
Cleveland would be more relevant. Although Congress designated it as a 
national park and the NPS maintains various facilities there, large 
swaths of it are actually county parks (both by name and in terms of 
day-to-day operation). The park is pockmarked by private businesses, 
residential subdivisions, Superfund sites, and formerly even Cleveland's 
professional basketball arena. Interstate highways crisscross the area.

Many national parks in the U.S. have intrusions to some degree, even 
uncontroversial cases like Yosemite and Yellowstone. Cuyahoga Valley is 
less wild overall, but that's integral to why it's a national park in 
the first place. There are probably other edge cases like this in the 
eastern U.S.

I think ultimately, in each case, we have to weigh several factors: 
Congressional designation, NPS administration, manner of use, and size 
all seem relevant. Some factors influence what users perceive as 
national parks, while others influence the assumptions that data 
consumers make when they handle the boundary=national_park tag.

Would leisure=park plus operator=* capture all the salient information 
about the D.C. parks? It sounds like this thread has turned up other 
nuances that are usually the domain of protected area boundaries.

-- 
minh at nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us