[OSM-talk] id Editor auto-converts split polygons into MP relation

[Dave F]

On 29/10/2020 06:41, Simon Poole wrote:
> Am 29.10.2020 um 00:17 schrieb Dave F:
>> iD editor attracts a hell of a lot of "WTFs", doesn't it? I mean, 
>> even its most ardent fan must occasionally raise a Roger Moore eyebrow.
>>
>> bhuousel has taken the presumptive decision that the contributor's 
>> desired end result will always be a MP relation. This is wrong, plain 
>> & simple (& quite arrogant). iD editor should provide tools to allow 
>> contributors to make their own decisions as easily as possible & not 
>> take them on their behalf.
>>
> I'm not sure why you believe Bryan has or had anything to do with that 
> specific design decision, but he didn't, that happened a substantial 
> time before he had any formal involvement.
>

Because he was the only one to reply to github queries (2018) on this 
subject. He closed the query & he talks in the first person: "I'm OK 
with this being hard to do in iD."

But anyway... Point slit stands: Why did iD take this authoritarian 
position.

>> As has been noted other, editors don't make this assumption.
>
> Other editors don't try to synthesize an area type.
>

A split polygon with only an outer MP is not an "area".

>>
>> The correct solution to split polygons with tags on the ways is to 
>> rejoin those ways, not create a MP.
>>
> As I pointed out, the question is -when- to rejoin those ways.

As I pointed out, that's for the contributor to decide, not the editor.

>>  A MP with only one* outer is invalid.
>>
> Nope.

There's a clue in the name 'MultiPolygon' there has to be more than one.
Splitting into two serves no purpose, adds no quality. Entropy isn't 
beneficial for the OSM database.

Incomplete MP relations are not beneficial to OSM quality.

DaveF