[Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

Fernando Trebien fernando.trebien at gmail.com
Thu May 15 12:01:19 UTC 2014


Interesting. So it is in fact a rendered-related issue. Since you've
pointed out exactly where the problem is in the code, wouldn't it be
better to just submit a fix and standardize the mapping practice on
capital=[lowest admin_level of related boundary relations]? AFAIK this
should only affect rendering programs (not routing nor indexing).

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2014-05-15 2:51 GMT+02:00 Fernando Trebien <fernando.trebien at gmail.com>:
>
>> And some of these relations (though far from the top of the list) are
>> not assigned an admin_centre role, even though the node exists.
>
>
>
> btw.: The current definition for administrative relations says that
> admin_centre should be used one or no time in the relation, but what if
> there is more than one admin_centre, e.g. entities where the administration
> is split over 2 (or maybe more) places? My suggestion would be to change
> this part of the relation definition in order to allow special cases:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary
>
>
>>
>>
>> It seems that German capitals follow the pattern capital=[lowest
>> admin_level of relations in which the city is admin_centre], except
>> Berlin.
>
>
>
> because Berlin has the capital=yes (because of current mapnik rules
> capital=yes should be preferred over capital=2, as the style sheet only
> takes account of capital=yes or not yes:
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/project.mml
> ).
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

"Nullius in verba."



More information about the Tagging mailing list