On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 21:49, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Rather than a new relation type, I think it would be simpler to tag > the indefinite part of the boundary of whatever area feature with a > key like "indefinite=yes". [...]
This is a sensible solution and it's even simpler than what i was thinking of. > If we try to fix "maximal" and "minimal" area, we'll simply run into > more haggling- because the maximum and minimum do not have bright-line > definitions, any more than the indefinite line does. That's true. > Try as we might to make them go away, there are objects, observable > and named in the real world, that are areas, part of whose boundaries > are indefinite. Saying that such things can be only point features is > shortsighted. You are right. I've updated the proposal again. It now recommends to draw the connection to the mainland as a straight line and tag it indefinite=yes > I support the 'peninsula' proposal, with the caveat that the Wiki > should indicate that large (we need guidance on just how large) > peninsulas should not yet be mapped, because of the technical problems > in enormous relations. I forgot to mention this in the proposal. I've done it now. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
