This relation is also a bit over the top. This is supposed to be 'landuse' but doesn't make sense.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1067268 I think we should push this kind of thing back to the french border. Met vriendelijke groeten, Best regards, Ben Abelshausen On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be> wrote: > This can be done without using a relation. Multipolygons are widely > used for landuse but this is the first I see as a relation ... > > If the relation would have extra meaning to it (e.g. name="De > trappistenstreek" ) it would have added value but as it stands, this is > just adding complexity without adding value. But it's allowed according to > the wiki. > > Glenn > > > > > On 26-11-13 10:24, Ben Abelshausen wrote: > > What do you guys think about using multipolygons for landuse? > > An example here: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/3338083 > > I don't see the point of having this kind of relation. Maybe I'm missing > something. > Met vriendelijke groeten, > Best regards, > > Ben Abelshausen > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing > listTalk-be@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
