|
I am trying to add a node (a city) to an existing relation. I have searched but I haven't found instructions for doing this in the iD interface. Is this possible? What are the steps? Specifically, I am trying to add node 2638988934 to relation 238005. I've tried using the iD editor focused on node 2638988934, scrolling to the bottom of the left panel where it says "Relations" next to a disclosure arrow, clicking +, and then typing "Olympia" in the "Choose a parent relation" box, to no avail. The only things that show up are either bus routes or the administrative boundaries (county and state) that are already associated with the node. I've also tried just entering the relationship by number but that did not seem to work either. If there's documentation on this somewhere, or an existing answer to a different question, I'm all eyes. |
|
I think iD only shows relations that have at least one member downloaded already. Your best bet is probably to scroll east to the nearby cemetery that seems to be excluded from the city bounds and see if it appears in the list. It might take a bit of careful clicking to avoid deselecting the city node along the way. (Aside: Having a node and relation to represent the same city seems odd to me as it breaks the "One feature, one OSM element" principle, but I'm not sure if this is considered a special case.) Looks like if I scroll to the east I no longer get any options to add an existing relation, only to add a new relation. "Having a node and relation to represent the same city seems odd to me" -- interesting. I was considering it only because I see many cities with both nodes and relations (ex: Austin, Seattle, Washington DC, Paris, Derby). Should the nodes or the relations of those cities be purged? I won't risk contributing anything for now -- I don't want to mess it up -- I'm just curious about the resolution of the issue.
(15 Sep '20, 23:20)
nocathere
1
@nocathere
(16 Sep '20, 00:15)
Kovoschiz
@Kovoschiz OK, thank you. It's pretty confusing -- especially that it only applies to a minority of relations -- but I guess OSM has their reasons. I'll try to include both in my local dataset and then weed out the "duplicates" in some way, and I'll keep my hands off the data itself.
(16 Sep '20, 17:33)
nocathere
|
iD isn't easy for large areas and relations, a combination of both here. I added it using Level0 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/90949521.
@Kovoschiz: While of course being appreciated you helped out here may I suggest you wait a bit next time before doing such change. Now it has become impossible to find a way in iD suitable for nocathere.
@TZorn He commented "I won't risk contributing anything for now -- I don't want to mess it up -- I'm just curious about the resolution of the issue." as a concern below. One can surely play with the editor on his own without uploading. Regionally, this issue is common enough I can already manually find Eugene (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/904722443) and Albany (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/150958779) affected. I also suppose he is mainly concerned with an online editor, that he's willing to use object id. Level0 would fit his bill. Demonstrating a clear method would help meet his immediate (multi-question, multi-day) needs, without risking more confusion or frustration.