On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> well, this didn't prevent 12% of mappers to add neighborhoods as areas > anyway: http://taginfo.osm.org/tags/place=neighbourhood > The discussion was around neighborhoods that did not have a clear boundary, not the majority that have clearly defined boundaries. I believe we should add neighborhood boundaries that are clearly defined. > > > Tagging large things as nodes clearly lacks important information > (extent), and it makes nested stuff impossible (or requires relations > rather than getting it for "free" with implicit spatial hierarchies) > I agree using polygons is far superior to nodes. The question I'm raising is do these fuzzy areas belong in OSM. Using my example for the Cascadia (Independence Area) a polygon with the boundary could be used to search for features in the OSM database. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging