[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - relation type=sled

[Philipp Spitzer]

On 11/12/2022 13.10, Sven Geggus wrote:

 > This seems to be somewhat similar to the recent discussion about using
 > site-relations for camp-sites.
 > > Some people think that what I do in OpenCampingMap currently (using 
site
 > relations) is an abuse of the "One feature, one OSM element" principle.
That's an interesting observation, thanks. I agree that those proposals 
have some similarities :-)


 > Thus inventing another relation type for such loose bindings of distinct
 > geographical features would make more sense than using a site relation.>
 > Let us call this relation, type=feature for now.
 >
 > A native english speaker will probably come up with a better name.
Additionally, "feature" in the context of GIS has a specific meaning for 
many people, but however it might be called, I see your idea :-)


 > The tagging would then be (In my case):
 > type=feature
 > feature=tourism:camp_site
 >
 > and in your case:
 > type=feature
 > feature=piste:type:sled
 >
 > The **feature** tag should then make clear that **only one element** 
tagged
 > tourism=camp_site or piste:type=sled is valid in such a relation.
 >
 > This would then mark where all the distinct objects belong to.
 >
 > Would this be a viable path?
This would be a question to more OSM experienced people than me but to 
better understand your idea:

"type=feature" would mean that "this is a collection of related things 
and metadata where their relation cannot be deduced otherwise". And 
depending on the value of the additional "feature key" (like 
"feature=tourism:camp_site" or "feature=piste:type:sled") additionally 
allowed elements and their meaning would be defined (especially the 
"role" of relation members)?


Best regards,
Philipp