On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Pieren wrote:
>
> I still think that tags (like amenity=parking) are better on the ways
> than in the multipolygon relation even if the outer ring is split in
> multiple ways. Othewise, on all editors, you will see an empty way and
> you have to open a second dial
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Pieren wrote:
>
>> Othewise, on all editors, you will see an empty way and
>> you have to open a second dialog to understand the meaning of the way.
>>
>
> I don't know how to use relations in other editors, but in
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > 3) In most of these cases, I don't know what the donut hole spaces
> > are. Is there a way to represent this as a null space, possibly to
> > fill in later?
>
>
> If they are untagged, these holes are "null spaces". Only if you
> explicitly
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Pieren wrote:
> Othewise, on all editors, you will see an empty way and
> you have to open a second dialog to understand the meaning of the way.
>
I don't know how to use relations in other editors, but in Potlatch you
click on the way and it says "Parking: outer"
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> 2) Should the tags for the feature I care about be on the
>> multi-polygon or the outer polygon?
>
> It is better if it goes on the multipolygon, because theoretically the
> outer ring might be made up of more than one way in which case it w
Hi,
Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> The tags for the original is on the multi-polygon (not any of the
> member polygons).
> 1) Is this right, or is there some other expected result?
That's ok.
> 2) Should the tags for the feature I care about be on the
> multi-polygon or the outer polygon?
It is bet
