[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Site Relation

Marc Gemis marc.gemis at gmail.com
Mon Sep 7 05:49:15 UTC 2015


I think it is also used with historic, not only heritage, e.g. [1]

Thus there are at most ca. 3800 more.[2]

regards

m.

[1]
http://gk.historic.place/historische_objekte/translate/nl/index-nl.html?zoom=17&lat=50.66496&lon=7.24869&layers=B00000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFTFFFTT&select=r3580734
[2] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/historic#overview

On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Joachim <noreply at freedom-x.de> wrote:

> The relation type=site proposal [1] has been around for seven years
> now. Milliams is the original creator of the draft while Joshdoe
> cleaned up the proposal page, added some to the discussion and also
> sent out an RFC in 2011 [2].
>
> The relation has a bit of troubled history since the original idea -
> usage for a typical school - is strongly discouraged now. The RFC
> brought up the point that the relation is not needed if the feature
> can be represented by a polygon.
>
> The definition now is: "A way to group features (represented by
> nodes/ways/areas/relations) which belong together but cannot be
> adequately described by an area/multipolygon. [...] This relation is
> understood to group man-made objects. For groups of natural objects
> which share the same name see proposed relation Cluster. "
> Further changes since the last RFC:
> * The key site=* has been deprecated, better use the full tag instead
> (e.g. amenity=university).
> * The label role has been removed since this is strongly resisted by
> cartographers.[3]
> * The entrance role has been removed since it did not fit the new
> definition. Discussion is ongoing to readd it.
> * The perimeter role has been moved to a sub-proposal with new definition.
> * Documented usage examples from the wiki have been added.
>
> I'd like to bring your attention to the proposal. Please visit the
> proposal page [1] and add your comments to the discussion.
>
> Cheers, Joachim (Jojo4u)
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site
> [2]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2011-February/006730.html
> [3]
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/546#issuecomment-45504933
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150907/c9482462/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list