[Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

[Peter Elderson]

My answer only targets the question in the subject.

No matter whether you put the same name on all parts, or on or some kind of
collective, you need a way for data users to know that all the parts
together have a name.
Tagging the same name on all parts makes the name a free text id
needing uniqueness - for me a bad choice.
Yet another polygon around the area, don't like that. I think we have too
many of those already.
Tagging all parts with a truly unique Id in a special key could do the
trick, but who issues/manages the unique ids?
Putting the parts as members in a relation achieves the same: a unique Id
common to all the parts; the name tag and possible other common attributes
go on the relation.
This gives renderers the exact extent of the total area, and the extents of
the subareas, which can have names and other attributes of their own.
Since an MP does not cover all possible layouts, you would need a different
type of relation. Maybe an existing type can be used, or a specialised type
can be defined.

I would think a pilot project could test the concept for mappers, renderers
and other data users. If succesful, showcase. If not, document and delete.

Peter Elderson


Op vr 11 dec. 2020 om 17:11 schreef Anders Torger <anders at torger.se>:

> Hello,
>
> I was on this list a while back expressing some frustration over
> limitations when tagging nature and thought about getting involved in a
> process for change, but I came to realize that it's not feasible for me
> in my current life situation, so I've decided to continue be a normal
> mapper as before, doing what I can do with features that exist today.
>
> Anyway, if to be a mapper at all, I still like to solve some of my
> naming issues in the best/least bad ways possible today. I'm currently
> mapping a national park in Sweden, Muddus. It's in Laponia and consists
> of mighty wetlands and old forest. These wetlands are named, like is
> common in Sweden and Sami lands. For us navigating in wildlife, names in
> nature are important.
>
> A wetland polygon can be named in OSM, so the situation is better than
> for example for named slopes (also common). However, a wetland here can
> consist of both bog and marsh (and it's important to make the
> difference, since one is easy to walk on, the other not so much). That's
> two different natural types and thus can't be in the same multipolygon
> (as outers).
>
> Asking on OSM Help website for a solution I got the answer to make a new
> containing multipolygon and set the name on that. That would be quite
> elegant for sure, but JOSM warns about that, can't have a name without a
> type, and if I set the type, say natural=wetland without any subtype, I
> get a JOSM warning that I have natural features on top of eachother. If
> I still upload it OSM-Carto does render out the name but you can see
> that the wetland pattern of the outer polygon is drawn on top of the
> contained polygons, so it does not seem to be the way to do it.
>
> The least bad way I've come up with is to just name all polygons
> belonging to the same wetlands the same, and hope for that in the future
> smart renderers will understand that polygons with shared borders and
> shared name is the same named entity.
>
> Any ideas or suggestions?
>
> /Anders
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201213/20acdfb6/attachment.htm>