Re: [talk-au] State Forest boundaries

2019-01-26 Thread nwastra 
My proposal will not work as the notification about the rendering for 
boundary=protected_area 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=734592#p734592 
  
only applies to a few classes of protected areas as I read later info on github.
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/3656 


Very disappointing from my point of view.

nevw

> On 26 Jan 2019, at 5:44 pm, nwastra  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi
> the gazetted State Forest boundaries are not rendered currently on the 
> default map on the OpenStreetMap (OpenStreetMap Carto).
> landuse=forest is considered as forestry use and natural=wood are natural 
> wooded areas not subject to forestry but both are rendered the same.
> 
> When the State Forest is mapped in isolation the boundary of the 
> landuse=forest defines the area but as soon as an area of trees is mapped 
> extending beyond the State Forest boundary, as is expected, then the State 
> Forest boundary is not depicted.
> 
> Tag:boundary=protected_area   
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area 
> 
> 
> After looking at the options listed on wiki link above, along with the 
> Nature-protected-areas like national parks (and all the other CAPAD types 
>  ), I 
> feel that boundary=protected_area is reasonable tag for the gazetted State 
> Forest boundaries with further classification as Resources-protected-areas.
>  
> I feel the the State Forests are boundaries where tree resources are 
> protected or reserved for future forestry operations and need to be defined 
> by their boundaries on the osm.
> There are strict rules covering these areas and we should be readily able to 
> see them on the map.  
> State Reserve and Timber Reserve in CAPAD don’t capture the State Forests.
> 
> On the Resources-protected-areas 
> 
>  for particular countries I note that the United States has listed State 
> Forest under protect_class 15, this being described at the 
> Resources-protected-area section as …
> 15location condition: floodwater retention area, protection forest, 
> grazing land, … 
> 
> I propose that we also add ’State Forest’ to protect_class 15 on the 
> Resources-protected-area table.
> 
> With the most recent changes toOpenStreetMap Carto this would enable 
> rendering of the State Forest boundaries in the same manner as all the other 
> protected area boundaries.
> 
> Another partial solution would be to render landuse=forest differently than 
> the landcover tags but that is unlikely from my reading of the tagging and 
> rendering groups and if two separately gazetted forestry boundaries shared a 
> border the boundary between the two would not be depicted on the map anyway. 
> 
> Nevw
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] State Forest boundaries

2019-01-26 Thread cleary 

I'm not sure that the changes to OSM Carto will solve this issue as I think 
only a few protect classes have been affected - but perhaps it is worth trying.

I would like to see boundaries for a different reason - where two state forests 
are adjacent, the boundary between the two is not visible. For example, Bondo 
State Forest in NSW adjoins three other state forests and the boundaries are 
not shown on the map. If the proposed tagging allows boundaries between state 
forests to be visible, then I would be pleased.




On Sat, 26 Jan 2019, at 6:45 PM, nwastra wrote:
> 
> Hi
> the gazetted State Forest boundaries are not rendered currently on the 
> default map on the OpenStreetMap (OpenStreetMap Carto).
> landuse=forest is considered as forestry use and natural=wood are natural 
> wooded areas not subject to forestry but both are rendered the same.
> 
> When the State Forest is mapped in isolation the boundary of the 
> landuse=forest defines the area but as soon as an area of trees is mapped 
> extending beyond the State Forest boundary, as is expected, then the State 
> Forest boundary is not depicted.
> 
> Tag:boundary=protected_area 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area 
> 
> 
> After looking at the options listed on wiki link above, along with the 
> Nature-protected-areas like national parks (and all the other CAPAD types 
>  ), I 
> feel that boundary=protected_area is reasonable tag for the gazetted *State 
> Forest boundaries* with further classification as *Resources-protected-areas*.
>  
> I feel the the State Forests are boundaries where tree resources are 
> protected or reserved for future forestry operations and need to be defined 
> by their boundaries on the osm.
> There are strict rules covering these areas and we should be readily able to 
> see them on the map. 
> State Reserve and Timber Reserve in CAPAD don’t capture the State Forests.
> 
> On the Resources-protected-areas 
> 
>  for particular countries I note that the United States has listed *State 
> Forest* under protect_class 15, this being described at the 
> Resources-protected-area section as …
> 15 *location condition*: floodwater retention area, protection forest, 
> grazing land, … 
> 
> I propose that we also add ’State Forest’ to protect_class 15 on the 
> Resources-protected-area table.
> 
> With the most recent changes toOpenStreetMap Carto this would enable 
> rendering of the State Forest boundaries in the same manner as all the other 
> protected area boundaries.
> 
> Another partial solution would be to render landuse=forest differently than 
> the landcover tags but that is unlikely from my reading of the tagging and 
> rendering groups and if two separately gazetted forestry boundaries shared a 
> border the boundary between the two would not be depicted on the map anyway. 
> 
> Nevw
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> 
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] State Forest boundaries

2019-01-26 Thread nwastra 
If a specific protect_class seems seems too uncertain I guess protection_title= 
State Forest would be sufficient.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:protection_title

Nevw

> On 26 Jan 2019, at 5:44 pm, nwastra  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi
> the gazetted State Forest boundaries are not rendered currently on the 
> default map on the OpenStreetMap (OpenStreetMap Carto).
> landuse=forest is considered as forestry use and natural=wood are natural 
> wooded areas not subject to forestry but both are rendered the same.
> 
> When the State Forest is mapped in isolation the boundary of the 
> landuse=forest defines the area but as soon as an area of trees is mapped 
> extending beyond the State Forest boundary, as is expected, then the State 
> Forest boundary is not depicted.
> 
> Tag:boundary=protected_area   
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area
> 
> After looking at the options listed on wiki link above, along with the 
> Nature-protected-areas like national parks (and all the other CAPAD types ), 
> I feel that boundary=protected_area is reasonable tag for the gazetted State 
> Forest boundaries with further classification as Resources-protected-areas.
>  
> I feel the the State Forests are boundaries where tree resources are 
> protected or reserved for future forestry operations and need to be defined 
> by their boundaries on the osm.
> There are strict rules covering these areas and we should be readily able to 
> see them on the map.  
> State Reserve and Timber Reserve in CAPAD don’t capture the State Forests.
> 
> On the Resources-protected-areas for particular countries I note that the 
> United States has listed State Forest under protect_class 15, this being 
> described at the Resources-protected-area section as …
> 15location condition: floodwater retention area, protection forest, 
> grazing land, … 
> 
> I propose that we also add ’State Forest’ to protect_class 15 on the 
> Resources-protected-area table.
> 
> With the most recent changes toOpenStreetMap Carto this would enable 
> rendering of the State Forest boundaries in the same manner as all the other 
> protected area boundaries.
> 
> Another partial solution would be to render landuse=forest differently than 
> the landcover tags but that is unlikely from my reading of the tagging and 
> rendering groups and if two separately gazetted forestry boundaries shared a 
> border the boundary between the two would not be depicted on the map anyway. 
> 
> Nevw
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] State Forest boundaries

2019-01-26 Thread Warin 

On 26/01/19 18:44, nwastra wrote:


Hi
the gazetted State Forest boundaries are not rendered currently on the 
default map on the OpenStreetMap (OpenStreetMap Carto).
landuse=forest is considered as forestry use and natural=wood are 
natural wooded areas not subject to forestry but both are rendered the 
same.


When the State Forest is mapped in isolation the boundary of the 
landuse=forest defines the area but as soon as an area of trees is 
mapped extending beyond the State Forest boundary, as is expected, 
then the State Forest boundary is not depicted.


Tag:boundary=protected_areahttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area 



After looking at the options listed on wiki link above, along with the 
Nature-protected-areas like national parks (and all the other CAPAD 
types 
 ), 
I feel that boundary=protected_area is reasonable tag for the gazetted 
*State Forest boundaries* with further classification as 
*Resources-protected-areas*.
I feel the the State Forests are boundaries where tree resources are 
protected or reserved for future forestry operations and need to be 
defined by their boundaries on the osm.
There are strict rules covering these areas and we should be readily 
able to see them on the map.

State Reserve and Timber Reserve in CAPAD don’t capture the State Forests.

On the Resources-protected-areas 
 for 
particular countries I note that the United States has listed *State 
Forest* under protect_class 15, this being described at the 
Resources-protected-area section as …
15*location condition*: floodwater retention area, protection forest, 
grazing land, …


I propose that we also add ’State Forest’ to protect_class 15 on the 
Resources-protected-area table.


With the most recent changes toOpenStreetMap Carto this would enable 
rendering of the State Forest boundaries in the same manner as all the 
other protected area boundaries.


Another partial solution would be to render landuse=forest differently 
than the landcover tags but that is unlikely from my reading of the 
tagging and rendering groups and if two separately gazetted forestry 
boundaries shared a border the boundary between the two would not be 
depicted on the map anyway.




Personally I would remove any 'state forest' (or any other forestry) 
areas from any tagged natural=tree areas. There are at lest some that 
have been included in those tagged areas.



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] State Forest boundaries

2019-01-25 Thread nwastra 

Hi
the gazetted State Forest boundaries are not rendered currently on the default 
map on the OpenStreetMap (OpenStreetMap Carto).
landuse=forest is considered as forestry use and natural=wood are natural 
wooded areas not subject to forestry but both are rendered the same.

When the State Forest is mapped in isolation the boundary of the landuse=forest 
defines the area but as soon as an area of trees is mapped extending beyond the 
State Forest boundary, as is expected, then the State Forest boundary is not 
depicted.

Tag:boundary=protected_area 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area 


After looking at the options listed on wiki link above, along with the 
Nature-protected-areas like national parks (and all the other CAPAD types 
 ), I feel 
that boundary=protected_area is reasonable tag for the gazetted State Forest 
boundaries with further classification as Resources-protected-areas.
 
I feel the the State Forests are boundaries where tree resources are protected 
or reserved for future forestry operations and need to be defined by their 
boundaries on the osm.
There are strict rules covering these areas and we should be readily able to 
see them on the map.  
State Reserve and Timber Reserve in CAPAD don’t capture the State Forests.

On the Resources-protected-areas 

 for particular countries I note that the United States has listed State Forest 
under protect_class 15, this being described at the Resources-protected-area 
section as …
15  location condition: floodwater retention area, protection forest, 
grazing land, … 

I propose that we also add ’State Forest’ to protect_class 15 on the 
Resources-protected-area table.

With the most recent changes toOpenStreetMap Carto this would enable rendering 
of the State Forest boundaries in the same manner as all the other protected 
area boundaries.

Another partial solution would be to render landuse=forest differently than the 
landcover tags but that is unlikely from my reading of the tagging and 
rendering groups and if two separately gazetted forestry boundaries shared a 
border the boundary between the two would not be depicted on the map anyway. 

Nevw
  








 



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au