Yes, the jagged edge on the national forest matches closely the lines on the USGS topo maps, so it's believable.
The tagging is decent enough, but probably shouldn't have the landuse=forest. On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 5:32 AM, SomeoneElse <[email protected]> wrote: > malenki wrote: > >> >> I am done; due to some conflicts (a user surveyed some TIGER and other >> data meanwhile) and timeouts there are three changesets: >> http://www.osm.org/changeset/22917492 >> http://www.osm.org/changeset/22920297 >> http://www.osm.org/changeset/22921689 >> >> > Thanks for that. > > Also, there's some excellent "dogtooth forest" east of SLO too: > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/35.3763/-120.3810 > > (I could believe that the official "national forest" has such jagged > edges. The landuse=forest area? Unlikely) > > Cheers, > > Andy > > > > _______________________________________________ > Imports mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports > -- Eric Ladner
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
