Sorry, I'm no expert so I should have been more humble and not state it
as a "fact". I *think* multipolygon was supposed to be a way to make
single entities of complex shapes, and these groups are not really
single entities, but multiple entities with single names, and thus I
find it "superior" to have a specific tag for that. I'm satisfied with
using a multipolygon though, and that is what I do now. This group
naming is fairly common where I map that I need it now and can't wait
until some unspecified time in the future when a specific group tag
might be rendered.
I suppose you could turn the argument around and say that it's better to
use multipolygon and not add bloat with a specific tag. And when the
state is as it is, the multipolygon way is the closest to actually do
what we need, I can agree with that. I'm all for results.
/Anders
On 2020-11-07 06:57, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
Nov 6, 2020, 23:39 by and...@torger.se:
One example is making a multipolygon instead of the semantically superior
group, as multipolygon actually renders.
Why multipolygon is supposed to be semantically inferior?
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
