Bug in Philippines relations?
Hello, I think there is a bug in relation tree generation. Bangsamoro, Bicol Region, Cagayan Valley, etc. are part of Philippines (443174), not Philippines maritime boundary (2850940), yet OSM Boundaries database says otherwise. Which variables do you use to map them?
(2) Philippines | Relation: Philippines (443174) | OpenStreetMap
- (6) Kalayaan | Relation: Kalayaan (1822309) | OpenStreetMap
(2) Philippines maritime boundary | Relation: Philippines maritime boundary (2850940) | OpenStreetMap
- (3) Bangsamoro | Relation: Bangsamoro (3821409) | OpenStreetMap
- (3) Bicol Region | Relation: Bicol Region (3561455) | OpenStreetMap
- (3) Cagayan Valley | Relation: Cagayan Valley (1552192) | OpenStreetMap
- ..
Dataset Version: 2023-09-04
It's not a bug in our end. This is how the data looks. We only present the data, we do not create it.
Please refer to the (not to thorough) documentation to read how the tree and its hierarchy is built.
The tree is based on the administrative levels of the boundaries. Boundaries fitting inside another boundaries is placed as a child to the outer one, and that's how the tree is built. Each level in the tree is sorted on the administrative level and then on the name.