Re: “ a couple of islets with a collective name” We have a tag for that: place=archipelago for a group of islands.
There isn’t a common tag for a group of lakes with one name, probably because this is only common in some countries, especially near the Arctic region. We’ve talked about this issue before but did not find an existing tag. I would suggest a tag like natural=lake_group to be added to a multipolygon which includes each of the lakes, similar to how archipelagos are mapped. -Joseph Eisenberg On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 5:07 AM Anders Torger <and...@torger.se> wrote: > I'll make a small change to my naming strategy: use one multipolygon per > natural tag set, and thus minimize the number of same-named polygons. > > Normally, when naming entities which has all the same natural tags but > separate areas, such as a couple of ponds or islets with a collective name > (common), it's made as a single multipolygon with several outers. I've > heard that there are renderers that actually already today then render a > single text label. > > As natural tags differ in this wetland a single multipolygon is not > possible. However one can make one polygon per set of natural tags. For > this Rimmjoáhpe wetlend I then get away with two multipolygons, thus > greatly reducing the number of text labels rendered in some renderers, > while still being compatible with the other method of keeping every > adjacent polygon on their own. > > It also makes it easier to keep all parts together when editing as a > multipolygon is also a relation. > > /Anders > > On 2020-12-15 09:52, Anders Torger wrote: > > Yes we actually have some of that up here too. I've chosen generally not > to map it though as one cannot really verify it on the satellite photos, > and here in the vast nature in north it's not really reasonable to visit > all these places on foot so one have to rely on satellite photos for large > parts of the nature. > > I'm quite sure that overlapping polygons is not how one is supposed to do > it though. Soggy forests should have its own natural type, in Swedish we > call it "sumpskog", and the best fitting OSM tag for that seems to be > "natural=wetland; wetland=swamp". > > By the way, I've pushed an update of the Rimmjoáphe wetland now, removed > the relation and made a multipolygon to span the river. > > On 2020-12-15 09:03, Ture Pålsson via Tagging wrote: > > > 15 dec. 2020 kl. 08:26 skrev Anders Torger <and...@torger.se>: > > And about wetlands, couldn't those be just rendered on top of forests so > we didn't have to make these complex multipolygons? > > > It does make sense to have overlapping wetland and forest, though. To take > a swedish example: down here in 08-land (note to non-Swedes: Stockholm, > telephone area code 08 :-) ), we get very little open bog, but a fair > amount of soggy forest. > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
