I’m not an expert but I had a look at the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:site#Alternatives and it points to a multipolygon relation of a series of “outer” elements. At the moment the relation is a collection of nodes, but really they are areas, possibly not well defined, but certainly large enough to put a tent up in. I’d be changing the nodes to areas which would make sense and then a multipolygon to join them all together. I note also that there is poor downstream support for a “site” relation.
Alex From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> Date: Sunday, 14 July 2024 at 12:55 pm To: OSM-Au <talk-au@openstreetmap.org> Subject: [talk-au] Checking on site relation Could one of our relation experts please have a look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17833891#map=13/-35.1636/148.6804 to see if I've done it properly? It relates to https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4266915 where 4 separately named campgrounds are all linked together under 1 overall name. Thanks Graeme
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
