On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Tom, I think we need to have consensus about what we mean by admin centre. > +1 In my area, a local mapper also had the idea of adding the town hall building into the boundary relation. I did not revert this even though this resulted in the default map layer seemingly showing the town hall as an enclave within the administrative area due to the aforementioned catch-all rendering. Three things to discuss: 1. I think we need to discuss what the admin_centre relation role is intended for. I would generally prefer this to be used exclusively for the place=* node owing to existing tagging practices and software support. 2. I also agree that the current default map layer catch-all rendering instead of whitelisting should be updated. If ever we add new accepted relation roles for the boundary relation that accepts ways, then the catch-all rendering would become wrong. But this discussion should be done at the openstreetmap-carto GitHub repository. 3. Finally, I do think it is valuable to explicitly relate the city/town hall or state/province capitol building (or some other relation/way/node representing the administrative area's main office or seat of administration) with the boundary relation. As mentioned by Colin, there are cases where the city/town hall is not located within the administrative area so you cannot do some sort of spatial query to link them together outside of OSM. Currently, OSM does not have a tagging system to uniquely tag all administrative areas so that you can link the boundary relation and the city/town hall only by tagging alone as opposed to adding the city/town hall as a member of the boundary relation (or adding both into a super relation representing the administrative unit as an abstract entity).
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
