On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:00 PM Joseph Eisenberg < [email protected]> wrote:
> I added some comments to the talk page of your "type=group" relation > proposal. > > I would recommend simplifying the proposal to just be for groups of > nodes, because there are already relations for multipolygons (areas) > I disagree. I think a group of areas is semantically different from a multipolygon. If I will relate this to GeoJSON concepts, the first is like a GeoJSON FeatureCollection where individual Features are Polygons/MultiPolygons, while the second is just a GeoJSON MultiPolygon.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
