[OSM-talk] Proposed Relations

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Pieren wrote:
> I'm also surprised that the relation type=boundary is still considered
> as a proposal in the wiki.

[...]

> This is an example of "approved" relation which does not require a
> vote because it's already widely used.

There are no "approved" relations; there are those that are proposed and 
those that are established. A relation becomes established once it er, 
establishes itself ;-)

The formal process to move a relation from "proposed" to "established" 
is to use your favourite editor and create lots of instances of the 
relation where it makes sense, ideally in a way that annoys as few 
others as possible.

I believe the "boundary" relation should be clearly flagged as 
"established". I wanted to move it up on the "Relations" page but I find 
that the "Proposed" section is much better structured, plus we have a 
naming convention problem ("Relation:restriction" vs. 
"Relations/Proposed/Boundaries"). Should we rename 
Relations/Proposed/Boundaries to Relation:bondary?

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"