It's not the tagging. Other relations with boundary=protected_area + protect_class=6 are rendering fine in the OpenStreetMap Carto style. The code is here: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/5724017f5b549ba954d9d645c0b2383dd16237d1/project.mml#L1132-L1149 - boundary=protected_area + protect_class=6 is enough.
– Joseph On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 6:24 AM stevea <[email protected]> wrote: > Paul White <[email protected]> wrote: > > Does anybody know why the Coconino National Forest doesn't render on > osm.org anymore? I don't see any recent changes that would've messed > anything up but it's gone. I also noticed that the Klamath National Forest > is gone, as well. > > I'm glad to see august and more-technical members of OSM (Paul Norman, > Joseph Eisenberg...) chiming into this thread. > > I am the most recent author of this relation. I made minor changes to the > tags on the relations, not the members or their roles. Specifically, the > edit History (click View History link at bottom of object "pane") displays > the previous set of tags (and seems to have rendered to the o.p.'s liking), > which included: > > boundary=national_park + boundary:type=protected_area > > while the present tags exclude those, but include: > > boundary=protected_area + protect_class=6 > > I did this because boundary=national_park is not a valid tag on a USFS > National Forest per our evolving wiki > https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/United_States/Public_lands , which > prescriptively suggests this tagging. > > I believe it is safe to assume that the previous tagging of > boundary=national_park was incorrectly applied because it rendered, and > that the somewhat clumsy and collides-with tag boundary:type=protected_area > was added to be more consistent with the newer tagging scheme of > protected_area, though it excluded the associates-with tag of > protect_class=6 which my newer tagging added, along with the "proper" key > of boundary, not boundary:type. If you followed all that, thank you. > > The particular combination of boundary=protected_area + protect_class=6 > does render (as a thin green line and an occasional name=* value along > edges). And again, boundary=national_park renders, though differently than > boundary=protected_area + protect_class=6 — and rightly so, as these ARE > different entries: a national park is not a national forest and vice versa. > > > If anyone knows how to fix this, let me know. > > I believe there isn't anything to "fix" here: what appears to have > happened is that a wrong-tagging which rendered with a certain appearance > was corrected to be "more properly" tagged, and this renders, but > differently. As these are issues which may continue to be evolving > (relatively newer tagging schemes like protected_area compared to > national_park, as well as rendering support, or lack thereof, for various > values of protect_class), it is possible I lack full clarity into either > the present exception of or intended effects of these tags and the Carto > renderer. Here, I only offer my best explanation of present tagging and > rendering effects, not future ones. > > SteveA >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
