[talk-au] Checking on site relation

[Warin]

On 15/7/24 12:28, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 at 14:58, Alex Sims <alex at softgrow.com> wrote:
>
>     At the moment the relation is a collection of nodes, but really
>     they are areas, possibly not well defined, but certainly large
>     enough to put a tent up in. I’d be changing the nodes to areas
>     which would make sense and then a multipolygon to join them all
>     together.
>
>
> Thanks, Alex
>
> I thought about areas as well, but they aren't defined, so thought 
> that may be messy?
>
> & will an MP work when the 4 sites are spread over several km?
>
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 at 18:09, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>     This collection looks to be operated by the same firm .. but each
>     site has a different name ... and different facilities...
>
>     So I'd delete the site relation, put the operator tags on each
>     campsite.
>
> Yes, but while each individual site has its own name, the 4 of them 
> together make up "Wee Jasper Campground", so that should be shown 
> somewhere, shouldn't it?
>

I think that the 4 together make up[ the 'Wee Jasper CampgroundS' ...  
Quote "There are few places left as naturally and untouched as 
Reflections Wee Jasper campgrounds" ..

Yes I know they use "Wee Jasper Campground" as well ... but logic 
suggests campgrounds as there are more than one campground, the 
collection is geographic and administrative.


The NSW state government calls them 'Wee Jasper Reserves' 
https://www.nsw.gov.au/visiting-and-exploring-nsw/locations-and-attractions/wee-jasper-reserves


I do think these are council properties with a 'commercial' interest 
handling it for the local council.. thus an operator.


By using the tag 'name' in the relation the individual member get that 
name .. but thye each already have a name .. catch 22.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20240715/36c18328/attachment.htm>