[OSM-talk] Featured mapping, parks

M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Jul 4 17:51:26 BST 2011

2011/7/4 Josh Doe <josh at joshdoe.com>:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:21 AM, colliar <colliar4ever at aol.com> wrote:
>> Am 04.07.2011 02:09, schrieb Josh Doe:
>> >
>> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.76211&lon=-77.29749&zoom=15&layers=M
>> > <http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.76211&lon=-77.29749&zoom=15&layers=M>
>> > (Burke Lake Park)
>> Why is the lake from the park excluded ? Is it not part of the park ?
> I think I did so because the county park agency (FCPA) doesn't operate the
> lake, rather the state game/fisheries agency, VDGIF. I suppose I should
> include the lake in the park, and the operator tag on the lake will be
> considered to override the park operator tag.

IMHO you should keep the multipolygon for the operator, but include
the lake in the park (if it "is" part of the park). Anyway: we will
probably never get complex operating structures clean and unambigously
into OSM, at least not with the current schemes.


More information about the talk mailing list