Peter Reed wrote: > It may be a bit “belts and braces”, but in my view it’s also best to tag > the ways themselves as boundary=administrative and admin_level=x number > as well as tagging the relation. But that’s just because I have an > irrational fear of accidentally deleting a whole relation and never > being able to recreate it all. I suspect it’s not really necessary.
I'd rather see this practice continued, and it's also documented exactly this way on the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary#Way_Tags > Somebody may put me right, but I think the left-boundary and > right-boundary stuff was an early way of approaching this before all > problem of the hierarchies became apparent. I found it raised other It was. I've never used it, as it's impractical and limited and relations had been invented by the time I joined OSM. > On the way itself, adding boundary=admin covers all the combinations. If > the way is part of more than one boundary at more than one level then > admin_level=x;y seems best practice. After that each relation can cover > details like names, and anything else that is unique to each relation. boundary=administrative + admin_level=<highest order only> Oh, and please consider the use of type=multipolygon relations for these boundaries, and not the superfluous type=boundary variant. -- Lennard _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
