[Talk-GB] Adjacent nature reserves

[Warin]

On 27/06/19 22:11, Martin Wynne wrote:
>
>> seen this done in various places, but I've never understood the point
>> it. The two representations are identical in terms of the data, but
>> the latter requires 2.5 times as many objects and is much more of a
>> pain to work with in the editors.
>
> This happens a lot in my area. Huge areas of "farmland" have been 
> created as massive multipolygons, which are too big to fit in the iD 
> editor, and include ways shared with other areas such as equally large 
> multipolygon woods. It's a pain to split them up without damaging them 
> where they include areas which should be mapped as meadow, orchard, 
> scrub, etc., which I much prefer to map as separate closed field 
> areas, sometimes with their own name. area

I am reworking an tree area that I created some time ago .. it is some 
300 km long, 40 km wide (186 miles by 25 miles). There are several 
similar sized areas that exist in my locally to me. They have to be 
mulipolygons as they have holes in them. And people keep adding things 
inside them .. that are also holes in them (they usually omit making the 
hole, so an added car parking area will be covered by trees until I 
notice).

Map your closed fields .. and simply included them as an inner in the 
tree area?

>
> Likewise several woods are mapped as a single large multipolygon wood 
> where in fact they are several separate woods each with a *name*. How 
> can I apply names to parts of a multipolygon?

You cannot. However for 'my' above tree area there are several National 
Parks .. I map those and name them .. they still have the tree area 
through them (in parts) but they are still rendered and named on the 
map. I separate out the forestry areas as these don't have trees all the 
time, so they get landuse=forest rather than natural=trees.


I have other places where there are ways that are in up to 6 relations, 
much easier to map them this way for me. They all share this common way, 
when they move off this way they then 'only' share the remaining ways 
with typically 2 relations, possibly 4.

It is all variable as to what is easiest and suits the local map and the 
local mappers.