On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 09:05:53PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > > > 2. Oct 2018 19:27 by ricoz....@gmail.com <mailto:ricoz....@gmail.com>: > > > > On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 05:01:17PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > > >> > I can give you a case that is more complicated. The University of > >> > Edinburgh. As well as a main> campus, and a subsidiary mini-campus, > >> > it has individual buildings scattered all around the city.> It could be > >> > mapped as a multipolygon but it would be a lot of work. Imagine using a > >> > multipolygon> natural=wood to handle many individual, widely-spaced > >> > trees by poking lots ofi rregular, large holes> in it where trees > >> > aren't. > >> > See > >> https://www.ed.ac.uk/maps/maps > >> > <https://www.ed.ac.uk/maps/maps>>> <>> https://www.ed.ac.uk/maps/maps > >> > <https://www.ed.ac.uk/maps/maps>>> >> And note that what you get there > >> > is the first of five tabs> covering different agglomerations of > >> > buildings. > >> > > >> > I think the only feasible way of handling this would be a site relation. > >> > Maybe you can think of a better> way of handling it. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Why selecting buildings and tagging them to site relation is easier than > >> selecting building and adding them to a multipolygon realation? > > > > looks like abuse of multipolygon relation to me. > > > > > > > why abuse? Sole reason for multipolygon relations is to tag > disjointed areas or areas with holes in them.
you name it. AREAS. A university is not an area. Rcihard _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
