[OSM-dev] osm2pgsql and only-named multipolygons

[Richard Fairhurst]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I tend to be against strict rules of any kind but when it comes to 
> the question of what exactly a complex relation means I think it 
> would be good to have one definition which every tool writer 
> should aspire to implement.

I'd agree with your general point, but in the particular case of
multipolygons, it seems highly likely that these will be obsoleted by a
proper area type in API 0.7. The existing multipolygon type also seems to me
like a slightly uncomfortable bodge (albeit a necessary one at present) in
that relations are otherwise intended for metadata, not geometry.

So for the tools I contribute to, principally P2 and an upcoming Ruby PDF
renderer, I've taken a decision not to spend time on anything more than
rudimentary multipolygon support (one outer, tags on outer way), rather than
spending a month coding all-singing-all-dancing support and then have to
rewrite it when the area tag comes along. YMalmost certainlyV. :)

cheers
Richard



--
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/osm2pgsql-and-only-named-multipolygons-tp6858105p6858205.html
Sent from the Developer Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.