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
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 24, 2021. It is now read-only.
Via Giovanni Bessarione (Type: highway:tertiary, way 109368643, 15, , Polygon, 0 GOTO)
Mazara del Vallo (Type: boundary:administrative, relation 39318, 8, , Point, 0.0842660761759271 GOTO)
Trapani (Type: boundary:administrative, relation 39166, 6, , Point, 0.201223571443735 GOTO)
Isola Grande (Type: boundary:administrative, way 10364827, 4, , Point, 0.247943334970063 GOTO)
91026 (Type: place:postcode, , , Point, 0.0237432108093155 GOTO)
Italia (Type: boundary:administrative, relation 365331, 2, , Point, 4.33148222531914 GOTO)
The admin_level=4 boundary detected is wrong. In fact, the nearest admin_level=4 is [http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33900429 the coastline], and should be detected as [http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/39152 relation "Sicilia"].
I can't exactly tell what is behaviour is due to. "Italia", for example, is a relation spread all over Italy, so I'd say that "Sicilia" would be detected too. Maybe it prefers nearest closed ways instead of nearest (not closed) ways?
Kindly,
David
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Reporter: David Paleino
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 1.15pm, Wednesday, 27th April 2011]
Hello,
check this result:
http://open.mapquestapi.com/nominatim/v1/details.php?place_id=2133055671
The admin_level=4 boundary detected is wrong. In fact, the nearest admin_level=4 is [http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33900429 the coastline], and should be detected as [http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/39152 relation "Sicilia"].
I can't exactly tell what is behaviour is due to. "Italia", for example, is a relation spread all over Italy, so I'd say that "Sicilia" would be detected too. Maybe it prefers nearest closed ways instead of nearest (not closed) ways?
Kindly,
David
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: