Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 12/07/2010, at 9:06 PM, Markus wrote: Also I have noticed in potlatch the coastline seems to render better also when having the coastline separate as it will draw the coatline even if the park goes over it. Yep, sounds like a good plan. I think this can happen a bit because natural=coastline is high-tide, and some of the NPs extends to the low-tide level. On 12/07/2010, at 9:21 PM, Markus wrote: If there are rivers or lakes that are marked as coastline inside the parks you need to close the mouth and convert to a river, lake or river bank to render as water. Yep, I'll keep that in mind - although the river versus coastline thing is always a fun debate :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
- Original Message - From: Markus marku...@bigpond.com To: 'James Livingston' li...@sunsetutopia.com; 'OSM Australian Talk List' talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas One thing to add. If there are rivers or lakes that are marked as coastline inside the parks you need to close the mouth and convert to a river, lake or river bank to render as water. Note that if ,as a result of converting ways tagged as natural = coastline to a different tagging scheme, a level 12 tile no longer has any ways tagged as natural = coastline in it then the ti...@home layer may render a blue flooded tile. The oceantiles_12.dat file at http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/rendering/png2tileinfo will need amending to show the tie as no longer containing any sea. From the last few lines ofd http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/rendering/png2tileinfo/README it would appear the best way of getting this updated is to email tilesath...@openstreetmap.org David Markus ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
I don't think there is a need to merge the parks with the ABS suburbs or coastline. Better to leave them separate. It is also easier to edit in the future. I have noticed problems with mgkmap when merging anything with the coastline if an admin level is added as it only draws the coastline in garmin mapsource when the zoom level of the admin level is reached. I have been experimenting converting the coastlines to ways on there own and removing them from boundaries and have had great success in getting them now to show up in mapsource. Also I have noticed in potlatch the coastline seems to render better also when having the coastline separate as it will draw the coatline even if the park goes over it. Markus -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of James Livingston Sent: Monday, 12 July 2010 8:11 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas On 04/07/2010, at 8:11 PM, Markus wrote: Had a look, I like it. It is good you also have added leisure=nature_reserve or landuse=forest as it will render with default settings with mgkmap. The first bits of the data are up at http://osm.org/go/vJBtHMj-- (Magnetic Island NP and Townsville Common CA) and http://osm.org/go/vJAoQAF (Mingela SF). If anyone has any complaints, let me know in the next few days before I start uploading more. I haven't done any merging is the parks data with ABS suburb or coastal boundaries. If someone really else feels like doing that they can. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2997 - Release Date: 07/12/10 04:06:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
One thing to add. If there are rivers or lakes that are marked as coastline inside the parks you need to close the mouth and convert to a river, lake or river bank to render as water. Markus -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of James Livingston Sent: Monday, 12 July 2010 8:11 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas On 04/07/2010, at 8:11 PM, Markus wrote: Had a look, I like it. It is good you also have added leisure=nature_reserve or landuse=forest as it will render with default settings with mgkmap. The first bits of the data are up at http://osm.org/go/vJBtHMj-- (Magnetic Island NP and Townsville Common CA) and http://osm.org/go/vJAoQAF (Mingela SF). If anyone has any complaints, let me know in the next few days before I start uploading more. I haven't done any merging is the parks data with ABS suburb or coastal boundaries. If someone really else feels like doing that they can. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2997 - Release Date: 07/12/10 04:06:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
Had a look, I like it. It is good you also have added leisure=nature_reserve or landuse=forest as it will render with default settings with mgkmap. Markus. -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of James Livingston Sent: Sunday, 4 July 2010 10:00 AM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas On 30/06/2010, at 7:48 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: Is it worth using an additional classification:qld=national_park|conservation_park|state_forest, etc. (or similar), just to make things extra clear? That is, when you use a rule like Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area, I think it would be nice to also record that they are a conservation_park. On 30/06/2010, at 11:55 AM, Stephen Hope wrote: Are you actually going to put the fact that it is a State forest anywhere? Sure, landuse=forest is not a problem, but some sort of tag stating that it is a state forest (as opposed to private land) sounds appropriate. boundary=state_forest, and similar? They all have it in the name as well, although that's obviously not ideal if you actually want to render them differently. I've put a small (~110kb) .osm file up at http://www.sunsetutopia.com/qld_parks_ready.osm.bz2 which contains the results of tagging and merging together the park sections (where they're split in the original data). Magnetic Island is the most complicated one I've done so far. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2980 - Release Date: 07/04/10 04:05:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 30/06/2010, at 7:48 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: Is it worth using an additional classification:qld=national_park|conservation_park|state_forest, etc. (or similar), just to make things extra clear? That is, when you use a rule like Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area, I think it would be nice to also record that they are a conservation_park. On 30/06/2010, at 11:55 AM, Stephen Hope wrote: Are you actually going to put the fact that it is a State forest anywhere? Sure, landuse=forest is not a problem, but some sort of tag stating that it is a state forest (as opposed to private land) sounds appropriate. boundary=state_forest, and similar? They all have it in the name as well, although that's obviously not ideal if you actually want to render them differently. I've put a small (~110kb) .osm file up at http://www.sunsetutopia.com/qld_parks_ready.osm.bz2 which contains the results of tagging and merging together the park sections (where they're split in the original data). Magnetic Island is the most complicated one I've done so far. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
Makes sense. The IUCN Protected Areas Categories are an international standard, and there shouldn't really be any shoehorning to get Aussie protected areas to fit. To use a couple of examples (from NSW! :) ) Blue Mountains National Park boundary=protected_area protect_id=2 protection_title=National Park Wolgan State Forest boundary=protected_area protect_id=6 protection_title=State Forest cheers On 30/06/2010 5:54 PM, Markus wrote: You could use protection_title=Conservation park Usefull additional keys key value discription http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:protection_titleaction =editredlink=1 protection_title= wildlife sanctuary, Zapovedniki, Nationalpark, Special Protected Area, World Heritage Convention, Aesthetic Forest, Heritage River, Indian Reserve, ... Title or type of protection. The national destination, the formal title or type of protection (see level-table). Important! You should give this. To make differences within one level. At the end it gives too a sample of terms. Put the proper name as key-value. The individual labeling, f.e. like the phillipine Nipas Category. Markus -Original Message- From: Roy Wallace [mailto:waldo000...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, 30 June 2010 7:19 AM To: James Livingston Cc: Markus; OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:49 PM, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: Here's what I've currently got, any more comments? ... Is it worth using an additional classification:qld=national_park|conservation_park|state_forest, etc. (or similar), just to make things extra clear? That is, when you use a rule like Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area, I think it would be nice to also record that they are a conservation_park. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2969 - Release Date: 06/29/10 04:05:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
You could use protection_title=Conservation park Usefull additional keys key value discription http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:protection_titleaction =editredlink=1 protection_title= wildlife sanctuary, Zapovedniki, Nationalpark, Special Protected Area, World Heritage Convention, Aesthetic Forest, Heritage River, Indian Reserve, ... Title or type of protection. The national destination, the formal title or type of protection (see level-table). Important! You should give this. To make differences within one level. At the end it gives too a sample of terms. Put the proper name as key-value. The individual labeling, f.e. like the phillipine Nipas Category. Markus -Original Message- From: Roy Wallace [mailto:waldo000...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, 30 June 2010 7:19 AM To: James Livingston Cc: Markus; OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:49 PM, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: Here's what I've currently got, any more comments? ... Is it worth using an additional classification:qld=national_park|conservation_park|state_forest, etc. (or similar), just to make things extra clear? That is, when you use a rule like Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area, I think it would be nice to also record that they are a conservation_park. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2969 - Release Date: 06/29/10 04:05:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 28/06/2010, at 11:10 PM, Markus wrote: Sound good to me to leave the GLR number and Ecolink if you put it with a standard osm key. Here's what I've currently got, any more comments? 1) National park get boundary=national_park and leisure=nature_reserve. Should any of the standard, Recovery, Scientific, or Aboriginal NPs or Resource Reserves get marked differently (e.g. nationak_park=scientific)? Reading the QLD Nature Conservation Act '92, I don't think they make a general difference for what we use, but some of them may be more restricted due to regeneration for recovery. 2) Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area and leisure=nature_reserve. 3) State Forests get landuse=forest. Any leisure activities (e.g camping) get marked as their own thing, like tourism=camp_site, which isn't in this dataset 4) Forest Reserves and Timber Reserve (which are often adjacent to or in State Forests) get landuse=forest as well, I can't see any useful additional tags. 4) If there is a CREEK or ROAD polygon through an park, I'll add a waterway=river/highway=road way and merge that polygon into the surrounding park. I don't think we need the actual road-reserve polygons do we? 5) Everything that has a IUCN code gets that put as protect_id=1-6. 6) Do we want the EcoLink/GLR number data? I think it's just a identifier that the govt department uses, so it's only real use would be to help if we want to do process updates - however it may be easier just to diff the old and new data and do it manually, this stuff shouldn't change to fast. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
Hi James, Sorry but I have just been looking at the boundary=protected_area tag. It appears it is a new tag someone has made to render specific ways using KOSMOS rendering platform. I am not sure if it is an approved tag. Although I quite like the idea of it. May need to use the boundary=national_park Maybe someone can clarify. I was also looking at mkgmap (used to produce Garmin maps) and it appears that the default is to render off leisure=nature_reserve and landuse=forest and not boundary=national_park. Also no mention of protected_area. Markus -Original Message- From: James Livingston [mailto:li...@sunsetutopia.com] Sent: Tuesday, 29 June 2010 9:20 PM To: Markus Cc: 'OSM Australian Talk List' Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas On 28/06/2010, at 11:10 PM, Markus wrote: Sound good to me to leave the GLR number and Ecolink if you put it with a standard osm key. Here's what I've currently got, any more comments? 1) National park get boundary=national_park and leisure=nature_reserve. Should any of the standard, Recovery, Scientific, or Aboriginal NPs or Resource Reserves get marked differently (e.g. nationak_park=scientific)? Reading the QLD Nature Conservation Act '92, I don't think they make a general difference for what we use, but some of them may be more restricted due to regeneration for recovery. 2) Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area and leisure=nature_reserve. 3) State Forests get landuse=forest. Any leisure activities (e.g camping) get marked as their own thing, like tourism=camp_site, which isn't in this dataset 4) Forest Reserves and Timber Reserve (which are often adjacent to or in State Forests) get landuse=forest as well, I can't see any useful additional tags. 4) If there is a CREEK or ROAD polygon through an park, I'll add a waterway=river/highway=road way and merge that polygon into the surrounding park. I don't think we need the actual road-reserve polygons do we? 5) Everything that has a IUCN code gets that put as protect_id=1-6. 6) Do we want the EcoLink/GLR number data? I think it's just a identifier that the govt department uses, so it's only real use would be to help if we want to do process updates - however it may be easier just to diff the old and new data and do it manually, this stuff shouldn't change to fast. -- James= No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2969 - Release Date: 06/29/10 04:05:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 29 June 2010 23:18, Markus marku...@bigpond.com wrote: I am not sure if it is an approved tag. Although I quite like the idea of it. If it serves a useful purpose and it doesn't duplicate the functionality of another tag already well used, then just use it, tags don't need to be official, although a little common sense can be a good thing :) Several trivial tags put to a vote of late drew out an anti-voting movement, where the response was to just use it. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:49 PM, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: Here's what I've currently got, any more comments? ... Is it worth using an additional classification:qld=national_park|conservation_park|state_forest, etc. (or similar), just to make things extra clear? That is, when you use a rule like Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area, I think it would be nice to also record that they are a conservation_park. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 29 June 2010 21:49, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: 3) State Forests get landuse=forest. Any leisure activities (e.g camping) get marked as their own thing, like tourism=camp_site, which isn't in this dataset 4) Forest Reserves and Timber Reserve (which are often adjacent to or in State Forests) get landuse=forest as well, I can't see any useful additional tags. Are you actually going to put the fact that it is a State forest anywhere? Sure, landuse=forest is not a problem, but some sort of tag stating that it is a state forest (as opposed to private land) sounds appropriate. Stephen ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 30 June 2010 11:55, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: Are you actually going to put the fact that it is a State forest anywhere? Sure, landuse=forest is not a problem, but some sort of tag stating that it is a state forest (as opposed to private land) sounds appropriate. Most state forests, are called such and such state forest... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010, John Smith wrote: State forests aren't the same thing as national parks, state forests are government operated logging areas... not necessarily. In NSW it was that state forests had really loose rules about human recreation and national parks had very heavy handed rules so that you could happily picnic and whatever in the state forest everywhere but now the NSW Sparks and Wildfires has taken over the State Forest reserves so now expect fishing to be banned on the river reserves and all fun taken out of life. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
Hi, I would tag the forests that aren't national parks as landuse=forest and remove the boundary key. Unless they are protected areas where I would use the boundary=protected_area and the protect_id key. You could also use boundary=nature_reserve or boundary=landscape_reserve if it fits into either of these categorys. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kosmos_protected_area_rendering#Protected _Areas http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=protected_area Forests Landuse=forest National Parks boundary=national_park leisure=nature_reserve Protected Areas boundary=protected_area protect_id= I would also remove the non standard key names like derm.qld.gov.au:GLR_NUMBER and FEAT_NAME Markus _ From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of James Livingston Sent: Monday, 28 June 2010 9:54 AM To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas Hi all, I've been looking at http://data.australia.gov.au/127, which contains all the national parks, state forest, conservation areas and so on in Queensland. If no-one else had been doing anything with this, I'd been thinking about adding it to OSM. Current practice seems to be tagging them all as boundary=national_park, regardless of whether they're National Parks or other things like State Forests. Would adding national_park=state_forest and similar to the tags be a good idea? There's also a bunch of things like resource reserves and timber reserves inside the parks, any good suggestions about how to tag those? This would obviously be a manual piece-by-piece upload, since it would need merging with existing data there's interesting things like river/road names we can pull out (because it has the road reserves marked). A converted file with most of the attributes cleaned up is at http://www.sunsetutopia.com/qld_parks.osm.bz2 if anyone wants to look, but it still needs a lot of merging of polygons and the like -- James No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2967 - Release Date: 06/28/10 04:05:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 28/06/2010, at 8:16 PM, Markus wrote: Forests Landuse=forest National Parks boundary=national_park leisure=nature_reserve Sounds good. Protected Areas boundary=protected_area protect_id= Ah, the original data had IUCN codes, so I can put these back in as protect_id 1-6. I would also remove the non standard key names like derm.qld.gov.au:GLR_NUMBER and FEAT_NAME FEAT_NAME definitely won't go into OSM - however it's useful for me because it contains the road name for some of the ROAD polygons :) Should I leave the Ecolink and/or GLR Number tags in as a reference which identifies the area, so we can match with any future updates? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
Hi, Sound good to me to leave the GLR number and Ecolink if you put it with a standard osm key. Markus. -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of James Livingston Sent: Monday, 28 June 2010 10:31 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas On 28/06/2010, at 8:16 PM, Markus wrote: Forests Landuse=forest National Parks boundary=national_park leisure=nature_reserve Sounds good. Protected Areas boundary=protected_area protect_id= Ah, the original data had IUCN codes, so I can put these back in as protect_id 1-6. I would also remove the non standard key names like derm.qld.gov.au:GLR_NUMBER and FEAT_NAME FEAT_NAME definitely won't go into OSM - however it's useful for me because it contains the road name for some of the ROAD polygons :) Should I leave the Ecolink and/or GLR Number tags in as a reference which identifies the area, so we can match with any future updates? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2967 - Release Date: 06/28/10 04:05:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 28 June 2010 10:24, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: Current practice seems to be tagging them all as boundary=national_park, regardless of whether they're National Parks or other things like State Forests. Would adding national_park=state_forest and similar to the tags be a good idea? State forests aren't the same thing as national parks, state forests are government operated logging areas... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
