Thanks for the several comments from people. I decided to remove the relation and name each component way individually. I referred to this conversation in the changeset meta-data (source and source_ref). Regards --ceyockey.
-----Original Message----- >From: Werner Hoch <werner...@gmx.de> >Sent: Jan 6, 2013 4:54 PM >To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org> >Subject: Re: [Tagging] Names on relations and not component ways > >Hi ceyockey, > >Am Freitag, den 04.01.2013, 08:43 -0500 schrieb dies38...@mypacks.net: >> I recently created a waterway where I put the name of the waterway >> on the relation but not on the component ways which are grouped by >> the relation. >> This results in the name of the waterway not appearing in the standard >> Map view. > >AFAIR there's currently no relation type that inherits it's tags to the >member ways, so that the name tags are rendered on the map. > >Road routes do not inherit there ref tags to the highways, >associatedStreets do not inherit there street name to the highway >segments. Those relations use duplicate tags, too. > >There's only one rarely used concept of tag inheritance: >http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multilinestring >that is AFAIR not supported by the renderers. > >> I am wondering what current best practice is. >> Should name be applied to both component ways and relation, >> or is application of name to relation sufficient. > >For waterways, adding one name to ways and all names to the relation is >at least "useful". Longer waterways (rivers) sometimes do not have the >same name over the complete length, because they flow across different >countries. > >e.g. The Danube river: >http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/89652 > >> To me, not duplicating data would seem to be the better overall >> practice, and duplication of name on relation and component ways >> would seem to be a case of tagging-for-the-renderer. > >IMHO, redundancy is not always a bad thing. Just do not add too much. > > >> (p.s. the waterway in question => >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2676618) > >For that short waterway it wouldn't create a waterway relation [1], as >the benefits of the extra relation are low. >* no international names required >* no wikipedia reference >* the waterway has the same name on all segments. >* no gnis reference tag, ... > >[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:waterway > >Regards >Werner (werner2101) > > >_______________________________________________ >Tagging mailing list >Tagging@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging