[OSM-talk-be] some thoughts and remarks about border mapping

[Lennard]

Ben Laenen wrote:

>> So the way is tagged with the highest admin_level, and it renders as
>> the highest level border that way. This is also what Ben suggested.
> 
> Actually I want to see admin_levels inside each relation and then get 
> that highest admin_level automatically extracted to the boundary itself 
> (and an additional admin_level on the way for as long as that's not 
> supported).

Yes, after I sent it, I thought about the fact that admin_level should 
(also and firstly) be on the relations. In the Karlsruhe example you 
have to *know* from the relation name what kind of boundary it describes.

But until the renderers can perform this relation->way trick, we would 
indeed need the highest admin_level on the way as well, as you said.

>> I would suggest keeping a list on the wiki of relations used for
>> boundaries in Belgium. This should ideally* keep people from
>> generating multiple relations for the same border.
> 
> Then we need someone with a lot of time adding a list of all 
> municipalities and their deelgemeentes :-)

It can be built up over time. It's not like all municipilaties will be 
added overnight. My idea is that ideally people can look in this list to 
see if a boundary they want to edit already exists. It'll also be a lot 
of work to clean up boundary relations if people create new relations 
for the same boundary that already exists as a relation.

> Then they should be merged. Don't know if there are tools for that.

My plan is to delete his relation, since it only has a few ways 
describing half a km of road, and add those to my earlier relation.

> That reminds me that 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/WikiProject_Belgium/Cycle_Routes 
> should be put in some nice table with all relations. But we need some 
> good way to track progress.

Also, as with the boundary wiki page I mentioned above, people need to 
actually *use* these lists, to prevent something like the LF30 example.


-- 
Lennard