[Tagging] Non-geometrical ways in boundary relations
Eugene Alvin Villar
seav80 at gmail.com
Fri Jan 27 05:31:22 UTC 2017
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Colin Smale <colin.smale at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Tom, I think we need to have consensus about what we mean by admin centre.
In my area, a local mapper also had the idea of adding the town hall
building into the boundary relation. I did not revert this even though this
resulted in the default map layer seemingly showing the town hall as an
enclave within the administrative area due to the aforementioned catch-all
Three things to discuss:
1. I think we need to discuss what the admin_centre relation role is
intended for. I would generally prefer this to be used exclusively for the
place=* node owing to existing tagging practices and software support.
2. I also agree that the current default map layer catch-all rendering
instead of whitelisting should be updated. If ever we add new accepted
relation roles for the boundary relation that accepts ways, then the
catch-all rendering would become wrong. But this discussion should be done
at the openstreetmap-carto GitHub repository.
3. Finally, I do think it is valuable to explicitly relate the city/town
hall or state/province capitol building (or some other relation/way/node
representing the administrative area's main office or seat of
administration) with the boundary relation. As mentioned by Colin, there
are cases where the city/town hall is not located within the administrative
area so you cannot do some sort of spatial query to link them together
outside of OSM. Currently, OSM does not have a tagging system to uniquely
tag all administrative areas so that you can link the boundary relation and
the city/town hall only by tagging alone as opposed to adding the city/town
hall as a member of the boundary relation (or adding both into a super
relation representing the administrative unit as an abstract entity).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging