On Monday 06 August 2018, peterkrauss wrote: > > Seems a commom quality problem of part/whole confusion in the > Wikidata attribution or OSM's POI reference... And where there are a > need for "enveloping parts into a whole". > > [...]
The fact that there is no agreement on the nature of the relationship between Wikidata objects and OSM objects has been an important point of critique of the whole 'adding wikidata IDs to OSM' movement. You can read this up in the previous discussion here and in talk. OSM aims to map based on local verifiability. Therefore many things we map in OSM have no equivalent in Wikidata (because they do not satisfy the criteria for inclusion there) and many things in Wikidata cannot be mapped verifiably in OSM. And inventing some kind of collector relation that collects all objects that by some wikidata interpretation 'belong to' a certain Wikidata ID and thereby implements a 1:n relationship would not change that (it would just be pointless non-maintainable, non-verifiable dead weight in the database). My favourite example for this is the Amazon rainforest (but you can use other large eco-regions like the Sahara desert as well). You won't be able to verifiably map the Amazon rain forest in OSM as an entity. What we aim to do in OSM is to accurately map the woodlands of South America - which is still a very long way to go. But if this should happen it will happen locally because natural=wood/landuse=forest is locally verifiable while the abstract concept of naming some of this woodland the Amazon rainforest is not. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging