Hi Paul Norman

Not so long time ago you have triggered a discussion with your article
"Moving to stricter multipolygon parsing". The discussion lasted two/three
days, was intense and rather divergent (demonstrating that the multi-polygon
issue is still not "only for beginners"). After that I have not seen or
heard anything related to the issue on this forum. So, my question is what
happened?

As I understand, your suggestion is to allow tags only on the MPR level and
these tags should be none-conflicting (well, the WIKI documentation shows
that this was the original intention with MPR). The suggestion could have
large positive impact on the (area class) data quality. Therefore I fully
support the suggestion but yet I am not sure about the implementation. 

To shorten the discussion I would mention just a few arguments causing the
dilemma to me.

1. Your implementation is based on the assumption that the mappers will
check (lookup) the edits in a map that uses osm2pgsql as a parser. What if
the MPR conversion to geometries is not using osm2pgsql? Here the mappers
will still probably see the edits no matter where they put the tags. So, the
restrictions should come much earlier, probably in the editor systems.

2. At the same time, inserting the suggested restrictions in editors will
cause contradictions with the fundamental OSM documents. The WIKI sections
defining and illustrating the Relation and MPR notions not only allow but
even suggest putting tags on the members (even on border segments, on
holes.). So, in my opinion, the restrictions should be first implemented in
the OSM wiki documentation by refining/correcting the related sections.

3. Finally, the assumed "do-ocracy" (someone, once in the future, will
detect and correct the error) does not work very well. There are many
reasons to that. Let me mention two. There is a huge number of errors
(significant and "systematic" not counting POI related and of semantic
nature). So, it is maybe illusory to assume that the do-ocracy can cope with
so many of them. Further, many of these errors are never visible in raster
maps, mostly used by mappers. Consequently, do-ocracy will probably even not
detect them. But the errors are there and in layered vector mapping these
will be probably immediately visible. Just take the large number of river
sections tagged as lakes (or the contrary), replicated or almost replicated
areas/MPRs with different structures or just take the thousands of closed
riverlines (waterway=river).

Now, if these dilemmas are not only mine, then I would suggest an
alternative implementation model:

1. An OSM voluntary expert team should go through the WIKI documentation and
refine the MPR related notions and implement the restrictions.

2. The editor systems, used by mappers, should accordingly implement the
mentioned restrictions.

3 The expert team should use programs to detect the MPR related "systematic"
(versus random) errors and programmatically correct them in the source data.

Thanks for the attention, Sandor.

 

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to