Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > >> Let's go with type=area_with_holes then, roles outer and inner as >> before. All members are closed ways, the "inner" ways are contained >> in the interior of the single "outer" way. The area_with_holes is the >> interior of the "outer" way minus the interiors of the "inner" ways. >> The properties of this area are described by the tags on the "outer" >> way (one might also put tags on the relation here). The orientation >> of the ways doesn't come in. >> > > That's precisely what I thought the "multipolygon" type would do at > the moment (minus the fact that some don't yet have inner/outer tags > but that's being dealt with I believe). > > Bye > Frederik > > I too am a little bit confused: now the whole issue basically comes down to renaming the relation from "multipolygon" to "area_with_holes". But the inital proposal had some other features, like using the inner polygons' tags to render the inner polygons content directly (not as holes) + abandoning clockwise/anticlockwise approach.
Is the renaming really necessary? I think the existing renderers already know how to draw multipolygons even without outer/inner specification. > That may be what we want but a significant proportion of the existing > data also has: > 1) an outer ring which is not a single closed way > 2) the same tags on all of the ways Shouldn't this be handled just by fixing the inconsistent data? Igor -- http://igorbrejc.net _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
