Surely is_in is purely geographic/geometric and can only strictly apply
to nodes? A way can straddle a border, therefore a route relation can
also. Ways and route relations can have "name" and "ref" tags, which are
issued by a certain authority, i.e.are within a certain namespace. So if
a way or route relation straddles the border of such an authority's area
the name/ref will likely change on the border. So the concept of a way
or route being "in" a state/country/county etc can really mean two
different things:
* the name/ref for the route was issued by a certain authority
* all points (not just all nodes!) on the route are geometrically
within the borders of a certain authority
So which one is meant by "is_in" in this case?
In the case of the name/ref, these tags could be further specified by
the addition of some kind of indication of the issuing authority. Two
adjoining authorities may have identically named/numbered entities and
explicit disambiguation could be useful in some cases.
In the case of the geometrical argument, I would view an explicit
"is_in" as a mere performance optimisation; the point is contained
within one or more polygons which will tell you what territory it is in,
regardless of any "is_in" tag.
Colin
On 31/12/2010 13:57, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
Totally agree. More over, every time you use the symbol ":" in your
tag, you mean that the subtag is telling something more specific about
the maintag thats in front of it.
This methode should be introduced more widely all over OSM to avoid
annoying new and unnesseccerry tags or values.
Robert
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- From: dies38...@mypacks.net
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 12:00 AM
To: Tagging OSM
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Why addr:state rather than is_in:state?
(response to 2010-12-26 05:29:46)
(from ceyockey) I am of the opinion that "addr:state" should only be
used in the context of an address, not as a standalone synonym for
"is_in:state", meaning that I support the use of "is_in:state" for
routes. (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ceyockey)
==ORIGINAL BELOW==
From: Nathan Edgars II
Subject: Why addr:state rather than is_in:state?
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.tagging,
gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.region.us
Date: 2010-12-26 05:29:46 GMT (2 days, 17 hours and 26 minutes ago)
Many route relations use addr:state to describe what state the route
is in. Should a tag intended for addresses be used this way, or is
is_in:state a better tag to use?
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tekst ingevoegd door Panda GP 2011:
Als het hier gaat om een ongevraagde e-mail (SPAM), klik dan op de
volgende link om de e-mail te herclasseren:
http://localhost:6083/Panda?ID=pav_1235&SPAM=true&path=C:\Windows\system32\config\systemprofile\AppData\Local\Panda%20Security\Panda%20Global%20Protection%202011\AntiSpam
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
