All established relations (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations#Established_uses_of_Relations) seem to use k='type' v='something' to indicate what kind of relation it is. Later somebody may want to add a relation that describes eg. a group of lakes. I'd suggest we follow that template and include <tag k='type' v='group' />.
What's the difference between way and area in this context? Wouldn't area be a more natural way to describe an island? /Erik Hendrik T Voelker skrev: > Am 13.09.2008 um 19:17 Uhr schrieb Hendrik T Voelker: > >> just a short question: >> >> How do I describe a group of islands, like e.g. the Ertenholmen (consists >> of >> about 13 islands, islets, and archipelago in the Baltic Sea. >> >> I would expect to use the relation for that > > It seems there is not yet any solution for this. So how about the following: > > <relation ...> > > <tag k='group' v='archipelago' /> > > <tag k='name' v='A group of Islands' /> > <tag k='is_in' v='<country>' /> > > <member type='node' ref='<id>' /> > <member type='way' ref='<id>' /> > ... > </relation> > > The immediately arising question is, is "group" enough, or would you also > think that an > > <tag k='type' v='group' /> > > is required? I personally thing that is unnecessary redundancy, but then, who > knows. Maybe someone can point out why it is not. > > For choosing 'archipelago' as value, maybe someone has a better alternative. I > am no native English speaker. > > TIA > > Hendrik > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
