[Tagging] admin_boundary with multiple levels / county free citys / Kreisfreie Staedte

Eugene Alvin Villar seav80 at gmail.com
Wed Nov 6 01:22:06 UTC 2013


On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:28 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> Duplicating the relation seems easiest and is what I'd probably do,
> but of course it is not 100% correct as there aren't two different
> admin boundaries (or, in the case of Hamburg, and Berlin, three - here
> admin_levels 4,6,8 are folded into one).
>
> So if we wanted
> to make it a rule that boundaries are duplicated, we'll certainly have
> some explaining to do.
>

Maybe we can apply the idea of a geometric relation (I think first proposed
by Frederik, I believe) and use that as a member for an administrative
relation. The geometric relation is tagged like a multipolygon and only
represents the boundary as an abstract line. Then we have several admin
boundary relations of different admin_level=* tags that has this geometric
relation as a member.

Cons:
1. We would have 1 more relation to deal with
2. The relation-in-a-relation concept is complicated

Pros:
1. It would be slightly easier to determine that two admin_level boundaries
are coincident without doing geometric calculations or member comparisons.

Now that I've written the above, I think the complexity is too big for the
problem it solves.

So I'm in favor of duplicated relations.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20131106/907bd92b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list