Are there any examples of a type=site relation used with a natural=* feature tag where this is appropriate?
In the list of combinations natural=* is not shown (less than 1000 uses): https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/type=site#combinations About 50% of current site relations are from an import, and are combined with site=geodesic + source=©IGN␣2010␣dans␣le␣cadre␣de␣la␣cartographie␣réglem + network=NTF-4 or NTF-5 Another 28% are site=stop_area + source <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source>=naptan_import <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/source=naptan_import> + The most common tags that specify a feature type are amenity=* (3 869 uses), power=* (2886 uses), heritage=* and historic=* (1358 uses). These are all man-made features. On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 4:51 AM Yves <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, restricting to 'man-made' objects doesn't make sense. > > This relation type is particularly unloved, yet it is not by restricting > its definition in the wiki to something less that it is 'in use' for that > it will automatically disappear. > > Yves _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
