On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> wrote: > We tend to explicitly tag whether something belongs to the site or not.
That doesn't make it right. > Anthony wrote: >> It's redundant to have the same information >> expressed twice, and doing so will only lead to conflicting data. > > The relation would express whether something is logically part of the > site; the geometry would express whether something covers the same > ground as the site. This is not the same information. How not? A bridge which goes over a site would be in a different layer, and wouldn't "cover the same ground". A road which goes through the site, but is not considered part of the site, would split the site into two parts, and would make the perimeter a multipolygon. Note that all I said is "If you can outline a perimeter, you don't need a relation." If you can't outline a perimeter, then you may need a relation. Having a perimeter and a relation is the problem. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
