Ideally suburbs would have a relation for the boundary PLUS a node for the "label node" as part of the relation. I'm not so familiar with Victorian locations, but this example for South Albury in NSW is an example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5901488
Where there is a boundary and a separate place node, I would add the place node to the relation and its role would be "label node". On Fri, 5 Nov 2021, at 2:15 PM, Dian Ågesson wrote: > Hey all, > > I would appreciate the thoughts of the community with regards to suburb > representations. > > In a recent change set > (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113355648) a node was > introduced for Gruyere. Gruyere is on the urban boundary, but is > technically in Metropolitan Melbourne. As such, it straddles the border > between what could be considered a bona fide suburb, and an independent > town. > > Mick has correctly pointed out that many of the other localities in the > area are represented by both an area and a node. > > Is this the way all suburbs should be represented? Or is it an > urban/rural distinction? > > > > Dian > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
