I forgot to list again the old ones: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.2509&lon=7.4284&zoom=12 -> Gemeinde Hatzenport rel_546634 -> Gemeinde Löf rel_546642 -> Gemeinde Lehmen rel_546640
Am 08.10.2010 16:07, schrieb Josef Latt: > Other boundaries shown as river: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.7548&lon=7.3343&zoom=12 > -> Relation 'Hennef (Sieg) rel_36042' > > Greetings > Josef > > Am 08.10.2010 07:37, schrieb Josef Latt: >> >> >> Am 07.10.2010 21:37, schrieb Torsten Leistikow: >>> Josef Latt schrieb am 07.10.2010 20:03: >>>> That means that a tagging like this is false? >>> ... >>> >>>> <tag k="boundary" v="administrative"/> >>> ... >>> >>>> <tag k="waterway" v="river"/> >>> >>> If the river itself is the boundary, then this tagging is ok. >>> >>> But in such a case, you can't complain, that the boundary is shown as a >>> river, >>> because the displayed element is a river as well as a boundary. So it is >>> just a >>> matter of display priority. >>> >>> >From your screenshot I can now guess, what you mean: There are also other >>> >ways >>> in the map, which are dislpayed as river, although they are only tagged as >>> boundary AND NOT as river at the same time? >>> >>> If this is the case, I would guess, that the complete boundary is made up >>> out of >>> a multipolygon. >>> >>> In this case the multipolygon tagging seems to be faulty. Either all outer >>> ways >>> must be tagged the same (this can not be, since one part is tagged as a >>> river, >>> while other parts shouldn't be rivers), or the tag values for the >>> multipolygon >>> must be placed on the relation instead of the outer ways (this is also not >>> done >>> in the example, since the boundary tag is on the way and not on the >>> relation). >> >> That is to high for me, as I'm relativ new in tagging. >> But I can't see any difference to other boundaries with IMHO same >> tagging. E.g. >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.2275&lon=7.4450&zoom=15. It's >> rel_546624. >> >> Greetings >> Josef >> _______________________________________________ >> mkgmap-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
