I see that the rendering of protected areas on the main map is, if not done, at least close to being there. It's great to see this issue nearly laid to rest.
There's one further thing that I'd like advice about. I'd encoded 'watershed recreation area' as protect_class=12 protection_object=water, The chief object of protection is drinking water quality - the areas are also incidentally open to public recreation (hiking, nonpowered watercraft, hunting, fishing, trapping, bird watching, ...) under various constraints. Similarly, I'd tagged 'wildlife management area' as protect_class=14, 'protection for species'. This was especially true where there was a single species (e.g., Myotis lucifugus, Phaisanus colchicus, Aix sponsa, Haliaeetus leucocephalus). It appears that current protected area rendering focuses on the IUCN-defined classes rather than OSM's extensions (which appear to be more specific), and that in the new scheme, 12 and 14 would not render. I'm thinking that I should replace the 14's with 4's because that's what IUCN would call them. The 12's are less clear to me - they are under stricter constraints than the species-protected areas, but nothing from 1-3 appears to fit. Ought I to call them 4, or 6, or 7, or beg the OSM Carto developers once again to please render 12? _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
