[Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

Yuri D'Elia wavexx at users.sourceforge.net
Thu Aug 8 17:39:53 UTC 2013

On 08/08/2013 08:56 AM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote:
> On 08.08.2013 01:24, Pieren wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Friedrich
>> Volkmann<bsd at volki.at>  wrote:
>>> It should rather be a type=collection relation.
>> I really hate "type=collection". One of the worst idea in OSM. All
>> relations are collections.
> At least it is semantically correct, while type=site relations are often
> used for features on multiple sites.
> You can think of type=collection as an abbreviation of
> type=bare_and_general_collection. All other relations have special
> members (e.g. inner/outer in multipolygons) or at least special meanings
> (type=route).
> type=cluster has also been suggested. I would be ok with it, but it
> would require a proposal to make it more popular.

What about type=site with the appropriate natural tag?


I was just looking at the wiki, and type=collection seems to be pretty
frowned upon.

More information about the Tagging mailing list