While I believe that this is in general a good idea, I don't agree with tagging those place objects with admin_level tags. It would lead to more confusion and I don't see why we would need it, or what it would solve (rather the opposite: it would contradict the place concept of a place being something orthogonal to administrative structures).
Clearly (and I think you wanted to say this but have just omitted it by accident), place=* should be added to these place entities (to indicate the kind of place, like city, suburb, etc.). I don't think (boundary) relations are strictly needed (the only advantage is explicit coupling of the node with the area, which otherwise would have to be done by name comparison and spatial analysis), but if it makes mapping those easier I won't oppose. Naturally multipolygon relations can make sense if the area is big / has complex boundaries. I very much agree on separating landuses from places / quarters / etc. Btw.: never quite understood why we (still) have place values like "county", "municipality", "state", "borough", "district", "subdivision", "country", "province" and some others, which clearly refer to administration. As you're already tackling places, IMHO you could try to deprecate these in the same go. Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
