And that's what it's called, too. "Los Padres National Forest"
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Eric Ladner <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > -- Eric Ladner
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
