On 09/06/19 23:58, Martin Wynne wrote:
we now have 2 natural=heaths named as nature reserves and with
operator tags but
without nature reserve tags.
Hi Adam,
But they are now nested within a larger area which does have a nature
reserve tag. Much of the publicity material for this area treats it as
a single nature reserve.
But the nature reserveS have different names and ownership and should be
tagged as such.
The heath is the common aspect between the two yet this is where the
names and ownership are applied? This is clearly tagging for the render.
And it fails
https://www.openstreetmap.org/query?lat=52.3600&lon=-2.2836
Results in the wood and the combined nature reserve ... but no idea of
which nature reserve applies here.
The two nature reserves should be separate entries as nature reserves -
which is what they are. Truth in tagging should be applied.
--------------------------------------- Quibble
There is also the aspect that the heath has a wood in it .. yet the
heath covers the wood. The heath should be a multipolygon relation with
an inner for the wood....
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb