[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Site Relation

Tobias Knerr osm at tobias-knerr.de
Wed Feb 2 19:58:14 GMT 2011

Josh Doe wrote:
> The Relation:type=site proposal [1] has been around for over two
> years, and I think it is a very useful relation, so I'd like to help
> it get approved.
> [...]
> I've been using this relation for schools and playgrounds,
> and I believe it is a needed addition to our tagging arsenal.

It might be useful in some cases, but it shouldn't be overused. If the
site is adequately described by a polygon, it can and imo should be
mapped as an area with the appropriate tags.

For example, a school that occupies one site with some buildings, sport
facilities ... can trivially be mapped as an area with amenity=school
and other tags (such as name) referring to the entire site, with
separate elements for the buildings contained within.

A site relation wouldn't add any information that cannot be determined
by an is-in-polygon test, a well-explored algorithmic task.

I can support the proposal if (and only if) it is made clear that site
relations are only to be used where simpler tools aren't sufficient.

Tobias Knerr

More information about the Tagging mailing list