sent from a phone

> On 17. Apr 2019, at 01:48, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> Yes, that’s my recommendation. You just need a tag that is for groups of 
> lakes. 


multipolygon relations have different semantics, they “combine” the parts while 
the group is about an ensemble. With the group relation you do not “just need” 
a tag for groups of lakes, trees, stones, sculptures, summits, and any other 
group of things.


> 
> Archipelagos are mapped as multipolygon relations tagged with 
> place=archipelago, name= and type=multipolygon. This makes it easy to search 
> for, does not duplicate the place=island tags on each island, and can be 
> rendered with existing tools.


and doesn’t work for islands mapped as nodes. I agree that place=archipelago 
has a well defined meaning and helps to better understand what the object is 
about, especially those represented with a multipolygon relation, where it 
isn’t clear from the members what kind of thing the whole is.



> 
> A named group of lakes is similar to a water equivalent of an archipelago 
> (especially if they are not connected by rivers)


all groups of things are similar in this regard. The most meaningful property 
(the reason people would usually want to create an explicit relation between 
the parts, on top of the already existing implicit relation through proximity), 
is a common name that wo/mankind has given to it. 

For rendering support (or search / geocoding support), the group relation would 
probably depend on osm2pgsql supporting it. Derivative auxiliary geometry (and 
ontology, possibly size information) would be created in the osm2pgsql step, so 
the rendering team would not have to walk down the list of members to guess the 
domain of the thing, where it is or how big it is.

For humans looking at the data, a group of trees, lakes, dunes, tombs or 
sculptures will be easily understandable, computers may have a harder time but 
would usually not need to „understand“ it, for most applications a rough idea 
of the domain (e.g. key level meaning like “historic”, “natural”) and extent is 
all they actually need to know.

Cheers, Martin 
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to