[Tagging] boundary=administative on ways

[Mateusz Konieczny]

5 Feb 2021, 23:32 by matkoniecz at tutanota.com:

> There are multiple ways how boundary=administrative and admin_level
> tags may be placed
>
> - both tags on boundary relation such as > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1435909
> - both tags on way such as > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/199228161
>
> As result following methods may be used
> - (1) both tags on relation, no tags on ways
> - (2) both tags on relation and both tags on all ways
> - (3) both tags on ways, without relation
> - (4) both tags on relation, boundary=administrative without admin_level on way
>
> (ways may also have for example waterway tags, if boundary is defined as
> following changing course of a river)
>
> I)
> Is there any benefit from using method (4) over either (1) or (2)?
> Is there any tool that requires boundary=administrative on ways but
> does not need admin_level on ways?
>
> I am asking that question as (4) is used in Poland and there is proposal to remove
> this bare boundary=administrative from ways. JOSM, Vespucci and Osmose all
> complain about this tagging. And noone wants to duplicate admin_level on ways.
>
> So there is a proposal to switch to "both tags on relation, no tags on ways"
> version, and I wonder is there any drawback to such action.
>
> II)
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary#Way_tags
> recommends (2).
> "Boundary ways should have boundary=administrative and the admin_level=* for the highest border"
>
> Would it be OK to mention that creating relations without duplicating tags is also acceptable?
> Or maybe even preferable?
>
> Repeating this info on ways seems to me an equivalent of adding
> "highway=motorway" on every node of motorway, or
> "multipolygon=yes" on every way belonging to multipolygon.
>
> Note that default map style, JOSM, iD, OSMand all have no trouble with relations
> without tags on ways.
> (maybe there are some subtle bugs? At least I have found nothing problematic)
>
> I know that ÖPNVKarte requires tags on ways, but administrative boundaries are not 
> prominent in this map style anyway (also, I just reported this issue to style author
> so there is a small chance that it will change)
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:%C3%96PNVKarte#Boundaries_tagged_as_relation_only_are_not_shown
>
> Is there any good reason to maintain such duplication?
>
Right now I am interprering situationas- relations are clearly wanted and needed- tagging on ways is relict that is no longernecessary and would be ok to remove them
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210207/ad451aa8/attachment.htm>