My understanding is that areas should not overlap only where they are of
a similar type. Areas of natural=wood and boundary=national_park aren't
similar and so it's fine for them to overlap.
On 8/10/21 6:25 am, Adam Horan via Talk-au wrote:
"Where something like the boundaries of a State Park and a forested
area are not the same."
I'd say that this is common and expected, and should be handled with
separate areas.
I feel it's very much the old style of mapping to put 'natural=wood'
on a park admin boundary.
Adam
On Fri, 8 Oct 2021 at 08:38, <fors...@ozonline.com.au
<mailto:fors...@ozonline.com.au>> wrote:
Hi
If you were told this by changeset comment, can you give the URL?
Tony
> Hi everyone
> I am a basic OSM editor. I usually just correct obvious map
errors I find
> while hiking/cycling. I have tried to be a little more ambitious
every now
> and then, but I have found it can be quite difficult to keep
other editors
> happy with what I do.
>
> My question is: Can you have overlapping 'areas'? I was told by
someone in
> this group that you can't.
>
> For example; Where something like the boundaries of a State Park
and a
> forested area are not the same. This is the issue where I was
told that you
> can't do that.
> This makes no logical sense to me as this happens all the time.
>
> I would appreciate some guidance on this issue.
> Kind regards
> Andrew Parker
>
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au>
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
