Use of `admin_level` on `capital`s

[pavvv]

@ezekielf

But why though?

I don’t know which point you’re referring to so I’ll answer both.

1. label, as previously established, is a terrible name. It implies that it exists only for rendering and sounds like tagging for the renderer. centre on the other hand represents the social centre of a place which benefits rendering and also tells you where the e.g. town square is located.
   admin_centre has issues because on the wiki it says that it’s supposed to be only used on capitals and not capitol even though ‘Administrative center’ on Wikipedia refers to the capitol. The current usage is a mix of both. This is why I think that there should exist a role for both. If for some reason there shouldn’t exist a capitol role then there should still be capital because, as previously described, admin_centre is a bad name.
2. The stripping of tags is to signify that a place has defined borders. As shows by others in this thread this might happen rarily for stuff like cities or neighbourhoods but it’s very common for states, etc.

@ezekielf

Unfortunately, all maps based on OpenMapTiles only show country and state labels where there are place=country or place=state nodes. I don’t know how many data consumers rely on these nodes, but they clearly aren’t ignored by all software.

Alright then, the goal should be to convince those apps to change.
Note that place=country should then be put on the relation.

@Minh_Nguyen

capital:of=*

I don’t like tags like this one or capital_city=* because objects like cities should be represented by osm objects, not names. I guess wikidata could work but I think we should utilise relations when they exist.

@lonvia

As has been repeatedly said by others: the place tag (both on nodes and on areas) refers to the socio-human concept of settlements.

They could overlap though. Nobody from Bielany Wrocławskie will say they’re from Wrocław and they likely like it that they don’t live inside a big city because of some benefits.
The residents of Fordon, a town that was joined to Bydgoszcz in 1973 will say that they live in Bydgoszcz.

Yes, they might be separate features but when they share the same area, I encourage dual tagging of place=city and border_type=city on relations.

@lonvia

My favorite example here is London.

That’s my most hated example. But when I want to get technical then I can say that the biggest city of the UK is actually Birmingham.

@lonvia

So, I’m very much against deleting place nodes.

Sorry, but I don’t think anybody besides some apps finds place=state nodes useful.

@ezekielf

his is why a boundary=administrative is a different thing than a place=city|town|village even though they can be closely related.

I see that you didn’t refer to countries or states this time. Great that you notice the difference.

@ezekielf

Even where they can both be represented by the same geographic area, they are still to separate concepts.

Sure. But they might have the same area and I enourage dual tagging because having identical objects spanning the same area is annoying.