[OSM-talk] is_in, isin: namespaces

[Tom Higgy]

Hakan Tandogan wrote:
> Tom Higgy wrote:
>> Currently is_in is basically a list of tags, although in most cases in a
>> particular order. Different people put in different levels of details
>> (some just county, some include country, some continent). Using
>> namespaces allows one to know Shropshire is the county, for example,
>> without having to guess it.
> 
> Could you please check [[Relations/Proposed/Is_In]] too? Does the "type" 
>  tag there fit what you need?

 From looking at the proposal, I think yes. Using relations does add an 
extra hoop to jump through but it should be doable far more easily than 
trying to add tags to 100k nodes.

Are there any is_in relations already in OSM?

>> I've been using isin:country, isin:county, etc, for a while as well as
>> is_in and I know some others have been too. It'd be nice to have it
>> standardised.
> 
> Yes, but I think this is one of the cases where a relation would be 
> quite handy.

How easy are relations to find/add to/create using existing tools?

> Maybe I'll start with a script that converts the various is_in tags to 
> relations.

That'd be great! I'd probably get round to it eventually, once I've read 
up on relations properly, but it's not high on my todo list.

Then it's basically a case of moving all places that appear to be wrong...

Cheers,

Tom.