Martin Koppenhoefer: > admin_level has no real "definition" in the wiki what it is supposed to > express: the key link redirects to boundary=administrative: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level > > ... > > Now there is also a key "capital" that can tell the administrative > importance for a place (it will contain the admin_level of the highest > administrative entity (=lowest admin level number) for which a place is the > administration centre), so no real need to have an admin_level with > duplicating values on these places as well. I think capital is a better key > for places then "admin_level", as any place will "have" lots of > admin_levels (e.g. 2 when it is inside a country) so semantically it > doesn't make a lot of sense.
First, this discussion it seemed was about removing admin_level tags, and not straightening up the tagging schema. I posted my reply because I had seen the tag removed from Berlin, not replaced by another. Left there is capital=yes tag, which is sometimes used along with admin_level=* ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:capital ). Having one tag instead of two to look at for admin_level value would be nice, but that should invoke some kind of a proposal (like when we [almost] bulk-replaced all building=entrance with entrance=yes). I'll support this decision no matter to which tag it comes to, capital or admin_level. But please, for now do not remove existing tags and do not put warnings in the wiki to not do something without providing a good alternative. IZ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
