Please see changeset/164113191

> you merged those perspectives together.

Isn't that natural? Maybe I misunderstand the point of having alt_name=* and old_name=* . Depending on the context, time period and focus, different names are used for a region with a given spatial extent. Also the name can change over time. We should try to generalize the region type.

If the article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appenzellerland had a section about the history of the region, it would include most of what is now in "Kanton Appenzell" or what HLS/DHS writes about. HLS/DHS/DSS usually writes about administrative areas, thus the cut-off. I don't see a problem with using its key on this feature. Nobody can guarantee any possible interpretation. HLS/DHS/DSS will always be about the history of a place with a cut-off somewhere in the past.

If you need a separate relation for your purposes, please feel free to create it. Splitting it just to match Wikipedia isn't desirable and potentially an endless quest, in my view. Even having three distinct relations is conceivable. Please share your view on how to map these.