On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Hakan Tandogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't doubt your reasoning that borders would be far better than is_in, > but sometimes you have to resort to "kludges" to get something off the > ground *today* Sure. > instead of some at future date when we have perfect data Who says it needs to be perfect? Boundaries could have status=rough_and_ready so that you can say "this is more or less the village for is_in types of things" without committing yourself to finding out the actual legal boundaries. When someone has more accurate data they can fix things up a bit - surely this is one of the OSM principles? By the time you've added more than three or four places in a village to an is_in hierarchy you could have just drawn the rough area instead, and it would be far more useful - the fifth, sixth and fifty-seventh items in that rough area wouldn't need any is_in tags at all. Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
