May I suggest looking at what people at the CORINE landcover dataset have defined?
http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/COR0-landcover/at_download/file they have a nomenclature describing a classification that is studied and looks usable to me. Martin Koppenhoefer schreef: > 2009/7/21 Tyler <tyler.ritc...@gmail.com>: > >>> In some cases they are so large that they're used to help orientate >>> yourself on a map. With out them the map looks less map like. >>> >> Correct, Washington State looks naked as low zoom levels without its >> corresponding parks and national forests. >> > > than you have to add more details (*duck and cover*) ;-) > > >> I think that national parks are a feature with particular implications to >> larger and/or newer countries--as far as rendering--(US, Canada, Russia, >> China, Australia, India, Brasil, etc.) which aren't particularly well >> represented in Europe? (that is a genuine question, I don't know the answer >> to). >> > > no, you can find them in all civilized countries, but they tend to be > bigger in bigger or less densly inhabited countries. In Europe there > are lots of these. > There are also special ones to protect bird, animals, plants, ... and > there are different levels (european, national, regional, ...) > > cheers, > Martin > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
