[Tagging] Interpreting "One feature, one OSM-object"

John Smith deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 22 14:41:08 BST 2010


On 22 September 2010 21:43, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com> wrote:
> They may need to be split later anyway if the river moves (say from
> erosion), but the administrative boundary doesn't. If however a river
> and boundary were split into different ways now then tags aren't mixed
> and cannot cause conflicts later on.

The example I gave of the Murray River is one explicit example where
the boundary is fixed the main flow of the southern bank of the river,
regardless what happens to the river the boundary moves with it.

Other water ways are the same, the boundary and the waterway are the
same thing, for all intents and purposes and there is no good reason
to separate them, in fact there is many good reasons to just leave
them as is.



More information about the Tagging mailing list