> Anders Torger <and...@torger.se> hat am 13.12.2020 15:28 geschrieben: > > So what I've settled for (for now) is as follows: > - same name on each part (the only way to get the data useful *today*) > - a new relation with all parts as members (role unset), type=natural, > natural=wetland, name=<the name>
I am trying to understand what the issue is with the recommendation for mapping you have received from multiple sides here. So what exactly is the verifiable knowledge that is supposed to be represented by your new relation type that is not already recorded in the mapping of physical features? -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging