[OSM-talk] Planned rendering changes of protected areas

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:05 PM, ajt1047 at gmail.com <ajt1047 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 30/11/2017 13:46, Daniel Koć wrote:
>
>> 1. Currently leisure=nature_reserve (old scheme) and boundary=* (new
>> scheme) are frequently tagged in parallel, and it looks like the old scheme
>> is used as a hack just to make it visible on default map.
>>
>
> Just to chuck one example in - I've tagged lots of
> "leisure=nature_reserve" and almost no "boundary=protected_area;
> protect_class=XYZ".  The reason is simple - nature reserves where I'm
> likely to be mapping often have a sign saying "XYZ nature reserve".  There
> isn't going to be a sign helping me work out what "protect_class" in OSM it
> is, so that doesn't get mapped.  It's also nothing to do with "what gets
> rendered"; I actually render my own maps and map quite a lot of stuff that
> isn't displayed there :)
>

Seems like it wouldn't be too difficult to consider the two as equivalent.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20171130/ece244c5/attachment-0001.html>