2014-10-07 18:32 GMT+02:00 Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de>: > > [...] In other words, for that template's usecase, > > ways/area/relations are separate sets, despite sharing primitives. > > > > Is that everyone else's understanding too ? > > Yes, I agree with this. Any changes should also be propagated to the > Description and KeyDescription templates, which have the same parameters > as ValueDescription. >
I think the icon "relation" is too generic to have any value. I agree that it makes sense to see multipolygons as subset of areas, but then there is only one tag that is suitable for generic relations: "type". The other tags that can make sense on a very specific relation (e.g. turn restriction related tags) would be better represented with a specific icon / field for this one specific relation type (e.g. turn restriction, route). There are few tags that are definitely not suitable for say a site-relation (also due to the fact that there are lots of different ideas what a site-relation should achieve). cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
