You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In another way of speaking, the query finds the relation 571771 and only this relation (first line), changes this relation into an "area" (second line) then tries to find all relations with a specific tag that are in this area (third line) : so it finds the relation 571771 itself but not the relation 3825989 when this relation is in the area (and is part of the relation 571771 itself as a member).
For me it is incoherent that the third line finds the relation 571771 and not the relation 3825989 : it looks like a bug
too much elements, a relation is in the result when not in the area :
So sometimes "map_to_area" gives not enough datas and sometimes too much datas : I hope you will find what is going on because this statement is (will be) very useful.
Best regards.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
There is some tweaking necessary here: the area operator so far does not find ways that are exclusively on the boundary and have no inner point. The rationale behind this is that usually one does not want to catch adjacent administrative units that share a common border with the area in question.
It could be decided that a way or relation exclusively on the boundary is indeed included, but I do not ad hoc overlook whether this has unintended consequences.
Hi,
I created this query : https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1yFn
The problem is that, in the area of the relation Marshall Islands (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/571771#map=6/9.579/167.003), the relation Naṃdik 3825989 (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3825989#map=6/9.579/167.003) is not listed in the result of the query and I don't understand why : this relation has the tag admin_level and is in the area so it should be selected, no ?
Same thing for the relation Enewetak 3825996 (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3825996#map=6/9.579/167.003).
In another way of speaking, the query finds the relation 571771 and only this relation (first line), changes this relation into an "area" (second line) then tries to find all relations with a specific tag that are in this area (third line) : so it finds the relation 571771 itself but not the relation 3825989 when this relation is in the area (and is part of the relation 571771 itself as a member).
For me it is incoherent that the third line finds the relation 571771 and not the relation 3825989 : it looks like a bug
I have another more complex result : the same query for another country (replace "Marshall Islands" with "Oman" in the above query). This country has a main area and 2 exclaves, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/305138#map=6/21.739/56.019. The final result shows all the relations inside this area (in particular the complex relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3781315 = good news) but also a relation which is clearly outside the area : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12905765#map=6/21.739/56.019
So sometimes "map_to_area" gives not enough datas and sometimes too much datas : I hope you will find what is going on because this statement is (will be) very useful.
Best regards.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: