[Tagging] boundary relations and the subarea property
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Thu Nov 26 18:51:46 UTC 2015
I just noticed that a lot of boundary relations have the lower ranking
parts included as members with the "subarea" role.
This role is documented here:
But I wonder how it got on this definition page. Was this discussed
anywhere? I don't think it's a good idea to add all those lower entities in
nested relations (they are already spatially structured, this is redundant
and makes the relations more complicated for no good reason).
I propose to remove this property from the definition page and move it to
the talk page.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging