In fact, the chunks are built so that each contains all the objects (nodes, ways, relations) belonging to only specific forests. That is, a relation in one chunk cannot have as its member a way from another chunk. In any case, the script I’m using can recover from network failures, in which case it will open a new changeset for every attempt, but will remember which objects were already uploaded. I think this is inevitable because network errors happen all the time.
Yes these are the entire forests as appear in the dataset, but these are only the forests managed by KKL. In fact, they warned us that the boundaries may not correspond to actual areas with trees, but rather they reflect the official designation by the land authorities (or something).
I agree.
Maybe this is just overkill to tag every way (there are lots of ways compared to just 278 relations, after all…) Despite the fact that right now there are no ways shared by two or more relations, this might change in the future (e.g. as a result of some automatic simplification/duplicate node removal)
If possible, I’d suggest adding " Forest" and "Yaar " to the English and Hebrew names.
e.g.
current name in excel: Beer Sheva
name:he (in Hebrew)=Yaar Beer Sheva
name:en (in English)=Beer Sheva Forest
I know of this limitation. (I cut a few ways in the past that were created before this limitation was imposed… Last time I checked, the longest way was around 800 nodes)
How many ways have more than 2000 nodes?
Can they be simplified in some way to have less than 2000 nodes?
If not, then another option is to cut one big loop into 2 closed smaller loops with shared nodes.
But this should be manual.
Sure, but how would the forest relation know how to connect them?
You’d need a relation to contain each of these more-than-2000-nodes-areas and add this relation to the forest’s relation (and not the individual ways that are part of the “smaller” relation)
I understand your concern. To be sure, I will take one such relation in OSM format and try to produce a mapnik/osmarender image as well as a Garmin map (unfortunately I don’t have experience with osm2gpsmid).
I’ll create a list in the wiki with all forests, like the places and municipalities.
Maybe we could have a list of non-KKL forests as well?
So we could see whether we’d like to keep them or not, and if we want to keep them - to tag them accordingly.