|
First of all my apologies if I tag this incorrectly this is my first post. I've been working In this area http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/46.6746/-122.3664 and decided to fix up the administrative boundaries. It hasn't updated all the tiles as my posting just yet, but the issue I'm having is that as you zoom in the land owner changes back and forth from Snoqualmie National Forest to Gifford-Pinchot National Forest. I'm not sure where to change this as it seems I don't understand how it changes as I zoom in to begin with. The forest is owned by the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest but administered by the Gifford-Pinchot National Forest so it's unclear to me how to set this up also. I guess I need to explicitly ask a question. How does one fix the change in ownership as you zoom and how does one handle the owner/administrator differences? |
|
There are two relations, one for Gifford Pinchot National Forest and one for Snoqualmie National Forest. They have the same members and hence the same geometry. So its not clear for the renderer which name to show. The second relation has been created by you, by the way. I'm not sure which name to keep. Usually the name is the name only and should be neither the operator nor the administrator. How is this forest called locally? 1
If I added that second relation it was completely in error and I have no idea when or how I did it. I do recall when I started working on the ground (literally) NW of there it was already giving me the two names, but maybe I did something to reinforce the confusion or at most, edited the name and changed it back. If the name is the name only, then I would say the proper "Name" would be "Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest" (national forest is in the name, not a descriptor). I'm reluctant to make any changes to the names/relations as I'm now afraid I'll mess it up
(25 Apr '15, 21:17)
aiwetir
I'm sure someone will help you out. It does look a bit weird on the map. Is the park really that pixelated? And is the forested area around it something else?
(26 Apr '15, 00:15)
joost schouppe
2
Pixelated, yes it's very typical for our national forest system to swap land with private land owners. They typically do it in checkerboard fashion, every other square mile (land survey plots). You can tell the private land from public land as the public land is usually more forested. The land around it is industrial forest land either forested or deforested. The checkerboard nature at least keeps public access open for the most part.
(26 Apr '15, 00:55)
aiwetir
1
No idea how you could have copied the relation, as far as I know iD doesn't even support that. Maybe a bug? Nevertheless I suggest to try fixing the bug yourself. Try to keep the original relation and fix its name and operator. Then try to delete your relation (the one with the fewer tags) by removing all members from it. If this doesn't work for you then just leave another comment here and someone else will fix it for you.
(26 Apr '15, 08:32)
scai ♦
|
doesn't footpaths-not-showing-in-certain-zoom-levels help? Means: are some zoom levels still the older state and some the state after your change?
No, this was existent before I made any changes. I made no changes to tags, ownership, or administrative uses, just the physical boundaries. Re your issue, I've had it take more than a few days to have a footpath show up at all zoom levels.
Just give the tiles some time to get rendered again. Especially lower zoom levels will take longer.
Please read my last comment, this existed before I started working on the area