Hi Stephan! Yes, a relation can be made up of a relation: no problem with that, AFAIK.
In your particular case, anyway, I'm afraid there is something wrong: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1937535 (name=MuseumsQuartier) is tagged as "building=yes" and also with "building:architecture=baroque", but in reality MusemQuartier is not "_*a*_" building, but an area, a cultural district (on https://www.mqw.at/en/ I read "/MuseumsQuartier Wien is one of the largest districts for contemporary art and culture in the world/"), made up of several different building_*s*_ ranging from the baroque to the contemporary era. MuseumsQuartier (/the district/) is already mapped with https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/335982323 as both a tourism=attraction and landuse=commercial (/yeah... I know... it seems we miss a specific tag for cultural districts and I think that's something we should address.../), and several of the tags applied to relation 1937535 (e.g. wikidata=*, wikipedia=*) are already there. Anything globally related to the MuseumsQuartier cultural district should be tagged on that way. If relation 1937535 is meant to map *one* of the several buildings which are part of the MuseumQuartier district, then anything related to the district should be deleted from it and probably the name should also be changed: a building is not a /quartier/ and I suppose the correct name for that particular building (/the baroque building encompassing the district/) to be /Hofstallungen./ The "building:start_date=1725" tag should be modified into just a "start_date=1725" tag, and the "start_date=2001-06..2001-09" tag should be instead applied to the /quartier /(/the way.../) if it is a property of the district, or, if it is meant to indicate the date of the /Hofstallungen /renewal, it should probably go into a note of the 1937535 relation or we could use and document a "renewal_date=*" key (/there is already 1 usage for that, here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7255270/). Cheers! Sergio On 2019-02-17 08:07, Stephan Bösch-Plepelits wrote: > In the particular case which I was describing in the opening mail > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1937535 > the building is already a multipolygon relation. > > Do you think a relation with a multipolygon relation as member would work? > Or would it be better to duplicate the multipolygon relation?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
