Just another data point to add to the discussion: JOSM currently warns that is_in=* tags are deprecated: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/changeset/14917/josm
Generally, tagging suggestions in JOSM are not usually controversial (unlike some of iD's tagging suggestions). Therefore, I usually delete such tags if they are redundant to administrative boundary relations. On the other hand, I would preserve them, or even add them (like for Brgy. Quinawan, Bagac, Bataan[1]), if the boundary relation doesn't exist yet. [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3085704286/history On Thu, Jan 23, 2020, 3:50 PM Eugene Alvin Villar, <sea...@gmail.com> wrote: > I generally agree except for the cases where the tag value corresponds to > an administrative entity that already has a boundary relation. In which > case I would then remove the tag. > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020, 10:16 AM Erwin Olario, <gov...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Until we have a complete, and accurate sub-national boundary polygons in >> the Philippines, I'd like to suggest that we avoid removing is_in tags, as >> these may still contain valuable information that cannot be deduced from >> still non-existent boundaries. >> >> What do you think? >> >> /erwin >> >> >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> » email: erwin@ <er...@ngnuity.net>*n**gnu**it**y**.xyz* >> <http://ngnuity.net/> | gov...@gmail.com >> » mobile: https://t.me/GOwin >> » OpenPGP key: 3A93D56B | 5D42 7CCB 8827 9046 1ACB 0B94 63A4 81CE 3A93 >> D56B >> _______________________________________________ >> talk-ph mailing list >> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph >> >
_______________________________________________ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
