OpenStreetMap
I recently surveyed the main paths at Croham Hurst, a tree-covered hill with two bare caps at the peak. It’s a beautiful, peaceful spot (and designated SSSI) just minutes on the bus from Croydon high street.
Anyway, my instinct was that, since the wooded area doesn’t accurately define the actual area called Croham Hurst (not only are the peaks bare but the wood extends slightly over the outer boundary), I should use a multipolygon for the wood, and a separate, overlapping area to define Croham Hurst itself. For want of anything better (there isn’t an establised tag for SSSIs/protected natural areas/etc I don’t think) I tagged it as “leisure=park”. But on Mapnik that made the woods render in a yucky greeny-turquoise. I know about “tagging for the renderer” but still, I wondered why it was happening, and whether it was partly a substandard choice of tags.
In the end I got inspiration from the nearby Addington Hills, tagging the “holes” as “natural=heath”, and replacing “leisure=park” with the generic “area=yes” (with a Wikipedia link describing what the site actually is). I’m certainly happy with how it renders – but hopefully fellow mappers will be happy with how it’s tagged!
토론
2012년 5월 25일 10:40에 Tom Chance님의 의견
I think the tag you need for Corham Hurst is leisure=nature_reserve: osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dnature_reserve
There was some discussion of improving the level of detail when tagging protected areas, which you could contribute to if you’re interested: osm.wiki/Environmental_OSM#Natural_habitats_.2F_landuse
I think the practice of tagging the “holes” with the correct landuse/natural tag looks sound.
2012년 5월 26일 13:28에 Pgd81님의 의견
Hi Tom,
Thanks for the comments. I’m not sure about leisure=nature_reserve – to me (and the Wiki), they’re more “managed” and often have restricted public access, whereas Croham Hurst is really just an attractive area of land preserved for public use, there are no access restrictions that I’m aware of (despite its SSSI status). Hence why I considered “leisure=park” – but that’s not really correct either…
On an unrelated note, I enjoyed your latest blog post re Rothamsted. I agree with most of what you say – I work in a scientific field myself (though not environmental), am interested in environmental issues, and don’t necessarily have a problem with direct action in certain contexts. But regardless of rights & wrongs, if the Greens want to be taken seriously as a political party they really can’t be seen to condone direct action, and I’m saddened that Jenny Jones, who I voted for in the mayoral elections, hasn’t done more to make the distinction clear.
2012년 5월 28일 16:57에 Rovastar님의 의견
For most of the UK these areas are tagged nature_reserve.
That is the way it is used in the UK.