On 15.01.2015 11:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > this is quite generic what has advantages (apllicable to everything) and > disadvantages (it might often not be clear, to what property the > "clustering" refers).
What do you mean by "property"? Can you describe an example? > I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to use the > approach of islands / archipelago, i.e. have a dedicated, explicit and > specific tag for the "combined feature" (e.g. several natural=island/islet > can be together in a multipolygon relation which is tagged > natural=archipelago). Multipolygons require areas. You cannot use them to group nodes (e.g. cave entrances) or lines (e.g, cliffs). > In your examples, there could be tags for several lakes: > natural=lacustrine_district / lake_district or maybe "series_of_lakes" > (didn't find a good English word for "DE:Seengruppe"). > > Didn't find a good one neither for DE:Höhlengruppe (maybe just plural > "caves"?) > > DE:Felsengruppe could translate to "natural=range_of_rocks" > (maybe also the caves could be "range_of_caves"??) I guess that while writing your message you altready noticed that the number of new tags would become gigantic. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
