Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [Tagging] tagging world heritage (UNESCO) and other protected areas/features
Hi, ... ... ... ... A problem might arise if a feature is at the same time protected for different reasons. If one feature/area is at the same time protected for different reasons, but belongs to the same ID and you can´t catch that by additional taggs, you can give # a further relation to that line or you have to make # a second boundary/layer (double, in the view of the ID), to give individual data (contact, ...) to the reason too. (same problem as without those protect_IDs ...) Its not uncommon that areas cover/overlap eath other (there is a including-hierachie: local regional national international). otherwise its to discuss, to establish further distinct protect_IDs in the 30th or 40th for the interstate and international (sometimes only award-) 98-ID. But they are not too much, and I think/wish, we come along with those about 30 main-IDs. That sort of what I used, though it's changed a bit since then. do you remember what? There's also problem of marking it boundary=protected_area and boundary=national_park at the same time. its not intend to use both. there is just a threat on gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.region.us boundary = national_park in the US there is a workaround-proposal: boundary=national_park boundary:type=protected_area where later a bot can change the boundary tag (may be possible(?), but today I don´t like that) f.e. a protected_area http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/44816271 ... links on the fraser-island I wouldn´t mix the protected_area (administrativ) with the landuse and I would copy the line, make two (I think, thats common?), because in the future, the vegetation will become more distinguished. ... best regards, t. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [Tagging] tagging world heritage (UNESCO) and other protected areas/features
On 12/01/2011, at 2:48 AM, John Smith wrote: Martin, for your information there was a bit of work done on this sort of thing in the past for Aussie parks covered by this, based on data from http://data.australia.gov.au I think. I uploaded the dataset I think you're referring to, after discussing tagging on talk-au. From: M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 3. The most universal feature is IMHO this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area allowing for cultural, natural and other protection types. A problem might arise if a feature is at the same time protected for different reasons. That sort of what I used, though it's changed a bit since then. There's also problem of marking it boundary=protected_area and boundary=national_park at the same time. Some examples: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/46152942 (Fraser Island) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/361693 (Gondwana Rainforests) At the time I don't think I knew about protect_id, but I used that later on National Parks. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fwd: [Tagging] tagging world heritage (UNESCO) and other protected areas/features
Martin, for your information there was a bit of work done on this sort of thing in the past for Aussie parks covered by this, based on data from http://data.australia.gov.au I think. -- Forwarded message -- From: M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com Date: 11 January 2011 22:34 Subject: [Tagging] tagging world heritage (UNESCO) and other protected areas/features To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools tagg...@openstreetmap.org Looking up the wiki there are several proposals for protected / listed features. 1. The oldest is this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/unesco_world_heritage suggesting historic=unesco_world_heritage actually I'd like to deprecate this because using the key historic will create collisions on many features (that are historic themselves, like historic=archeological_site), and there is the more detailed (2) covering the same features. 2. There is also this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/heritage The page suggests to use abbreviations as values, which is not according to our general tagging rules (and IMHO pointless, why not use the full word and get a more understandable mapping?). But there are some useful ideas for subtags on the page. 3. The most universal feature is IMHO this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area allowing for cultural, natural and other protection types. A problem might arise if a feature is at the same time protected for different reasons. IMHO we could try to unify those different proposals. Are there already practical experiences / tags in wider use? Are there other proposals covering the same issues? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list tagg...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
