[OSM-dev] OSM based replacement for builtup_area.shp in standard style

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

> Am 03/giu/2014 um 20:23 schrieb Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:
> 
> I doubt that; I think people are adding place=* to boundary relations


I have also noticed this in various occasions, while this is mostly/often "wrong" for whole settlements (they tend to have bigger administrative areas around them than the actually developed space, unless they are in very dense contexts and the end of one is the beginning of the next), it is often the right thing to do for settlement parts like quarters.

Didn't dig deeper into the issue about actual percentages of the different styles, but I know from discussions on the lists that there are at least a few examples of place areas on their own (this is a field where many mappers will delete your tag on an area because they'll say that it's duplicating data, and as the node gets rendered but the area not it is clear to them that the area must go).

cheers,
Martin