On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 7:19 AM, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harv...@gmail.com> wrote: > Quite a number of times I've noticed a single way having the tag > boundary=administrative (I assume having come from the Australian ABS > import and being part of a larger relation marking some town or > suburb) but also having waterway=stream (for example > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38128067). > > My interpretation of the "One feature, one OSM-object" suggestion > would be that this is bad because the single way is being used for two > different purposes (representing a river, and representing an > administrative boundary). Because then you don't know which tags refer > to the river feature and which to the administrative boundary feature.
I think "one feature, one object" is usually used in the other direction: you don't tag the boundary name=x and also put it in a boundary relation with name=x. You don't put a fast_food node in the middle of a building that only holds the fast food place; you put the fast_food tags on the building (or, even better, the parcel of land owned by the company, which includes the parking lot). Having a boundary relation and a node at the city center violates this guideline, but is a valid exception because the node carries other information about where the city center is. As for the specific question, I would say that if the boundary is defined by the natural feature, it's probably OK to use one way. For example, http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/78384443 is legally defined as "...to the water's edge of Little Lake Conway; thence run southeasterly along said waters edge to a point of intersection..." _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging