Hello,
I like this subarea because with it it's easy to get all the canton boundaries, but it's true that is not specified in the boundary relation, than it's a good idea to move it to nation relation who it's not strictly defined.
CU Stéphane
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Sarah Hoffmann lonvia@denofr.de wrote:
Hi,
while we are redoing all our boundaries in Switzerland, could we maybe discuss the format of the boundary relations once more?
In particular, I'd like to get rid of the subparts in those relations. As far as I know, we are the only country to include this subparts in the boundary relations. So, the first reason would be that we should do as everybody else.
The second reason is that the relation, as it is now, is a pain to process. In most other countrys, subrelations are used to group parts of the boundary (see France for example). Not so in Switzerland. Just because of us, special processing is needed (i.e. looking at the role).
I don't think the whole hierarchical grouping is needed at all. So, I would be really happy if they are just deleted. But if you really must have it, how about moving the subparts in the nation relation: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/16042
Sarah _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch