> As you say "feel like Type 2" I think is where it fuzzies in my mind. Parks > go to 3, 4, even 11 and beyond. Parks have a wide range of "experiences" > besides 1 and 2.
So do roads. There are countless kinds of roads, with varying levels of importance and physical features. Instead of using a catch-all "highway=road" tag, and instead of tagging infinitesimal levels of network importance (or any of the other countless possible metrics), we develop a classification system that allocates all roads into a small set of (semi)-easy-to-work-with-and-understand classes. Some roads don't fit well into this system, true. It isn't always clean; it can be ambiguous; it continues to be debated over, and that's fine. But, for the most part, it has worked, certainly better than the all-or-nothing alternatives would have. I agree with previous posters that this is same case with parks. In the same way that the fact that there is something different enough about a freeway and a narrow county back-road to represent them differently in the database, there is something different enough about a park I would take a kid to play on the playground for an hour, and a park that I can spend half the day mountain biking around in without encountering more than a small handful of people, that I think they should be differentiated between in our data. I don't think the title given to a piece of land should necessarily have bearing on the data representation, in the same way "Hampstead Heath" doesn't get "natural=heath" just because it's in the name. Currently, I use the tagging scheme detailed by Greg earlier. I am certainly not opposed to using "leisure=park" along with a basic classification tag, say "park=developed/undeveloped" or something, but Greg's scheme has the benefit of using established tags with rendering support that still more or less respect the definition and intent of the tags. While "leisure=nature_reserve" has generally assumed some kind of conservation status, I think the newish "boundary=protected_area" tags do a much better job detailing land conservation, and that "leisure=nature_reserve" is the perfect tag to adopt for the type 1 parks which Greg talks about. These 'type 1' parks are, after all, pieces of *nature* being *reserved* by a government agency for *leisure* of the public. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us