"Petr Morávek [Xificurk]"-2 wrote > Anyway, this thread was not started to debate tagging schemes, the > question I (and others) wanted to discuss here is this: > Given the data that are currently in the database, how should osm2pgsql > handle the import to get as much as possible multipolygons right?
Indirectly it is a question of tagging schemas. With osm2pgsql being the tool used in the default map rendering on osm.org and the prevalence of "tagging for the renderer" decisions on how it handles multipolygons will (and imho to a limited degree should) influence how people tag and what they perceive as correct tagging. Therefore it is important that there is a consensus of what the correct tagging schema is and make sure that is correctly supported by osm2pgsql. That is also why I think having this discussion on talk, rather than on github or the dev list is appropriate. We need to come to a consensus between all of the main tools (at least iD, P2, JOSM, osm2pgsql, osrm, ...) and the mappers to what the preferred, encouraged and supported standard for tagging multi-polygons is and make sure that all documentation is in line with this. -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/osm2pgsql-multipolygon-parsing-tp5778300p5778654.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
