On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> I'm importing the USFS data for the Ocala National Forest boundary. >> There's the actual forest boundary, and there are private inholdings >> inside the boundary that are not owned by the USFS. For flexibility, >> I'm making a multipolygon for each. But which one is the "real" >> boundary? What tags go on each? > > You're creating separate multipolygons for each of the private inholdings? > You should be creating one multipolygon with several internal ring ways as > "inner" members of the multipolygon relation. The whole multipolygon > relation should have whatever tags you've decided on and the member ways > should not have any tags.
That's what I'm doing. But I then have two multipolygons: one for the "forest boundary" and one for this boundary minus the inholdings. The difference is nontrivial, since some of the inholdings go right up to the "forest boundary", implying that the forest actually in some way includes these inholdings. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
