[OSM-talk] Do we care if its forest or wood? Natural world mapping ...

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Jul 21 16:47:52 BST 2009


2009/7/21 John Smith <delta_foxtrot at yahoo.com>:
>
> --- On Tue, 21/7/09, Tyler <tyler.ritchie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> landuse. While I'm not convinced national parks,
>> national forest wilderness areas,
>> federal/state/county/municipal wildlife reserves
>> shouldn't be solid fill areas in renderers,

well, imagine a well mapped place, where every landcover (say just
forests and lakes to make it simple) are mapped: would you render your
solid fill above (no other items visible) or below (not visible at
all)? I think a hatch above the other features (like diagonal lines,
or maybe even just an surrounding outline) are more suitable.

>> I have no
>> argument that boundary="reserve type" is
>> inadequate. I do think that there should be a better way to
>> tag nature reserves and allowed activities, to that end
>> I'm currently looking into regulations in non-US
>> countries with similarly regulated large areas (generic
>> applicable tags seem appropriate).
>
> In some cases they are so large that they're used to help orientate yourself on a map. With out them the map looks less map like.
>
> http://osm.org/go/uYrAQb--

I agree that they should be mapped and also rendered, but to make the
map look "map-like" I suggest to map landcover/landuse, roads, rivers,
...
In Germany there are lots of protective areas, some smaller, some
bigger, to give you an impression look on this map of Hessen (just a
small part of Germany but already loads of protective areas, click to
zoom):
http://atlas.umwelt.hessen.de/servlet/Frame/atlas/naturschutz/schutzgebiete/karten/schutzgeb/m_1_1_1.htm

> Two thirds of the Aust. Cap. Territory is national park, ACT is only 100 sq km I think:
> http://osm.org/go/uNPvyrl-

fine, I think this makes it clear that just one simple filling
wouldn't be adequate.

> Although it's hard to tell where the ACT is because state borders don't seem to render at higher levels or when I fixed them up I over looked something.

yes, that's an issue, there is this rendering problem (already filed a
bugreport some time ago) that smaller (lower) administration
boundaries are not displayed on reasonable zoom-levels.

cheers,
Martin




More information about the talk mailing list