Mike:/ "handling the *removal* of *duplicate *POIs that are *near* to each other but *not coincident*."/ Very useful! In the Netherlands I was involved in a discussion: Set [man_made=windmill] on POI-address-node (is rendered by JOSM and links address to POI) or Set on building (a windmill is not a node, but a building, but building tag is not rendered by JOSM)? Now solution has become "simple": set [man_made=windmill] on both "POI-address-node" and on building. Win-win situation thanks to Mike. But... also... http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/One-object-has-more-than-one-POI-tag-Hotel-Ca... One object has (or should have) more than one POI-tags. Examples: - tourism=hotel; amenity=restaurant - historic=building; man_made=windmill - shop=bakery; amenity=café ("konditorei") - amenity=bench; tourism=viewpoint - amenity=bench; tourism= artwork Gerd: /"2) You can create *multiple *POI using the *continue *statement."/ Yes, I can but now different POI's are on same location, which makes both POI's useless (mixed together). Mike:/ "<...> but the location of the *existing* point is *"MOVED"* to a point midway between the two points"./ Question: Is "moving" a "different POI" on the "same object" an *extra option* to resolve "mixed together" POI's? I know: not using "continue" will resolve (Renderer should decide what's more important: hotel *or* restaurant), but also implies a loss of information. -- Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Mkgmap-Development-f5324443.html