Fremont Central Park is a park located in Fremont, CA. There are several objects in it. None of these objects are shown to be part of the park when searched up on the map. For example, a lake in the park, Lake Elizabeth, is not shown to be part of the park when searched up. Oddly, it is shown to be part of a small nearby bridge. My question is: How am I supposed to have these objects shown as part of the park? I've tried using relations and multipolygons, but I am out of luck.

This question is marked "community wiki".

asked 24 Jun '15, 04:30

Suprav's gravatar image

Suprav
16112
accept rate: 0%

When you say "searched up", you mean the search on openstreetmap.org?

Those results are the output of one particular system for indexing the data:

http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=90306622

That system generally doesn't take note of whether things are inside a park or not. As scai says, the geometry should be enough for systems that do index such things.

I guess the lake probably doesn't really have an address (before you added one, the result you were seeing was from just matching it somehow to a nearby road).

(25 Jun '15, 01:01) maxerickson

I'm not sure, but expect that this problem is still not finally discussed at the community. AFAIK there are different opinions:

  • Yes, all such objects should be part of a multipolygone (site) relation to group them together.
  • No, Its not up to the mappers to tag objects for geocoder search. Instead it's up to the applications to do the boundary processing and create the hierachies dynamically.

I guess both statements have their pros and cons (maintainability, performance, ...). Usually I don't see relations beside multipolygones on landuse, but that can be an local phenomena.

permanent link

answered 24 Jun '15, 06:05

iii's gravatar image

iii
4.9k63780
accept rate: 11%

4

Usually the latter should be preferred. That is, do not create any unnecessary site relations as long as the information can be automatically deduced from the existing geometry information. If an object is inside another object then it is, well, inside this other object. There is no relation required to represent this. Site relations are only necessary if two or more objects belong together but are geographically separated.

(24 Jun '15, 08:08) scai ♦
1

Thanks both of you. It has made relations a lot more clear to me.

(25 Jun '15, 00:48) Suprav
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×189
×107
×29
×20

question asked: 24 Jun '15, 04:30

question was seen: 1,792 times

last updated: 25 Jun '15, 01:02

powered by OSQA