On 18 April 2017 09:23:10 IST, Paul Oldham <p...@the-hug.org> wrote: >On 16/04/17 23:10, molto...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Using a phone, sorry for the short answer to a detailed mail. >> >> Puting boundary-related tags on the ways is redundant (duplicates the >> relation tags), risks getting out of sync with the relation, handles >> ways belonging to multiple boundaries (always the case for countey >> borders) badly, and can be confusing (josm boundary rendering of the >way >> can mask other renderings). I often remove such tags from ways if I'm >> editing the ways. > >Yes, sorry about that, I fear I may have trampled on your work there. I > >don't yet feel confident enough to reverse out my changesets, >especially >given the dire warnings in the Wiki, but if someone more skilled wants >to do so then feel free.
No need to appologize, I don't think anybody feels their work has been trampled on. As Rory said, there's nothing actually wrong with boundary tags on ways, they're just deprecated in favour of relations. And just like created_by tags, editing the objects just to remove that tag would be pointless version churn, but removing them while doing other edits seems like a good thing. Unless the comunity feels that cleaning up the remaining boundary tags on ways is a usefull project in its own right ? Maybe to make sure that we've got a proper relation in all cases ? We've currently got 23k boundary=administrative on ways (65k on relations), most of them on geographically-larger boundaries. See http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ie/tags/boundary=administrative for the status and http://url.ie/11qtp to locate candidates for cleanup. -- Vdp Sent from a phone. _______________________________________________ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
