Yes, good point. And equally, it'd be unlikely for natural=wood and natural=scrub to overlap.

On 8/10/21 8:36 am, Adam Horan wrote:
That's probably a good rule of thumb, although with the addition of same type and 'level'.

Admin boundaries overlap and nest all the time, but you wouldn't normally expect two of the same type and level to overlap.
LGA within State within Country etc

On Fri, 8 Oct 2021 at 11:31, Sam Wilson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    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, <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>> 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
        [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
        https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au>


    _______________________________________________
    Talk-au mailing list
    [email protected]  <mailto:[email protected]>
    https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au  
<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au>
    _______________________________________________
    Talk-au mailing list
    [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
    https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
    <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au>

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Reply via email to