[Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

Friedrich Volkmann bsd at volki.at
Fri Aug 9 05:28:27 UTC 2013

On 08.08.2013 19:39, Yuri D'Elia wrote:
>> At least it is semantically correct, while type=site relations are often
>> used for features on multiple sites.
> What about type=site with the appropriate natural tag?
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site

See my paragraph that I quoted on top. Now in more detail: The proposal says:
"If all the elements contained within an area (the perimeter) belong to the 
site, and no elements of the site exist outside the area, then it is 
inappropriate to use this relation."
That means that the relation should only be used for elements in differing 
locations, i.e. NOT on one site. It is absurd to call that a "site" relation.

I also dislike the suggested special member roles: The positioning of the 
label depends on the font size, the free space, the map section and zoom 
level etc. and should therefore be determined by the renderer. The perimeter 
is implied by the other members. The entrance is implied by the entrance=* 
node(s) on the perimeter.

All in all, I see nothing good in the type=site proposal.

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

I don't know about the frowning. If you just look at pros and cons, you will 
prefer type=collection over type=site.

Friedrich K. Volkmann       http://www.volki.at/
Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria

More information about the Tagging mailing list