Hello Udarian,

I mostly map land cover and land use all over the world and I rarely, if ever, use multipolygons. I only use them if the geometry is complex enough to require them, which is not the case with the polygons I am adding nor is it the case with these canals - the topology is simply not that complex, especially considering I am careful to ensure they share the same nodes. I always edit with the "multipolygons only when necessary" approach, and this is the first time in my years of editing anyone has ever commented on this approach.

Furthermore, the canals can all be represented by individual canal area polygons and related through a relation if necessary. There is no need to store them as a multipolygon. It's easier on the database and if you are querying a specific local bounding box, you would only return the canal areas relevant to your bounding box instead of the entire canal.

This is especially true with the grass area in the interstate as the grass areas are not related to each other in any sense. They can easily be treated as individual polygons and storing them as multipolygons makes the data needlessly complex.

I'd actually suggest using /less/ multipolygons unless absolutely necessary.

Cheers
ArizonaMapper