<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Oct 30, 2020, 16:33 by talk@openstreetmap.org:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>A split polygon with only an outer MP is not an "area".<br></div></blockquote><div>It is a valid multipolygon representing an area.<br></div><div><br></div><div>A bit pointless multipolygon and maybe something that<br></div><div>should be converted to version not<br></div><div>using relation, but it is a valid tagging. <br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>There's a clue in the name 'MultiPolygon' there has to be more than one.<br></div></blockquote><div>Strictly speaking it means that it CAN have more than one part.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>Splitting into two serves no purpose, adds no quality.<br></div></blockquote><div>It does not make it invalid<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>Incomplete MP relations are not beneficial to OSM quality.<br></div></blockquote><div>MP with single outer and 0 inners is not invalid.<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>(this does not make it desired and preferable, but in this<br></div><div>case accusing iD of producing invalid relations is<br></div><div>baseless and invalid)<br></div><div><br></div> </body>
</html>