Reporter: timbl+openstreetmap[at]w3.org
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 9.58am, Sunday, 11th January 2009]

See #1473 for mapnik.
I added this to have a bug to flag Osmarender.

[http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/conservation landuse=conservation] is described in the wiki.
There are notes on rendering there.

A pale green, generally a yellowish tint, makes sense to me.
It would be good to distinguish between park, recreation ground etc which are managed, and leisure=common and landuse=conservation which are generally only lightly maintained. But there may have been some philosophy about the coloring as is which I am unaware of.

See [http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2008/osm/osmarender/test/legend.html test legend] generated from the current rules.

I would be content with ffixxes atthe relevant zoom levels like:

+++ osm-map-features-z17.xml (working copy)

@@ -33,6 +33,9 @
 		<rule e="way" k="landuse" v="landfill|quarry">
 			<area class="landuse-quarry"/>
 		</rule>
+		<rule e="way" k="landuse" v="conservation">
+			<area class="leisure-park"/>
+		</rule>
 		<rule e="way" k="landuse" v="cemetery">
 			<rule e="way" k="religion" v="christian">
 				<area class="landuse-cemetery-christian"/>

There are thousands of these in CRShmidt's MassGIS openspace import.
Examples near [http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.4011&lon=-71.1974&zoom=14&layers=0B00FTF Waltham area's Western Greenway].

This rendering fix is the last step before one can suggest conservation groups
could make it a part of their effort to check that OSM is accurate in their town, and add trails.

Thanks in advance!