Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 03:03:53PM +0200, andrzej zaborowski wrote: On 17 July 2011 23:55, Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de wrote: I recently stumbled upon some empty route relations, so I had a closer look at the OSM planet and found that there are about 10.000 orphaned relations in the database and the number is growing. With orphaned I mean relations that have no members and are not member of any other relation. Some are completely empty but most still have some tags. I have created a list of the relations sorted by last editing user here: ... Question remains what to do with the existing orphaned relations. Is there any legimate use for them or would it be save to simply delete them all? So I had stumbled on the same fact about a year ago and after some discussion on this list I deleted about 8000 empty/orphaned relations. It seems all except a handful of those 8000 relations had indeed been left in the not-deleted state by mistake. There were a couple (5) that had still been referenced from the wiki, rather than from inside the database through other relations. I got a couple of e-mails months later asking about those relations and undeleted them, it would probably be a good idea to check for references in the wiki beforehand this time. I don't think it makes sense to create such empty relations before any members are added to them because it's quite likely someone else is going to create a duplicate, but I don't have a strong opinion and being in the losing position as an author of an automated edit I didn't want to argue with the creators of these relations. I must have missed that discussion. So I gather it is pretty pointless to try and fix the database if new empty relations arrive with a rate of about 30 per day, time is better spent improving editors and/or creating a service where people can find their lost relations again. I'll look into it. A more final solution to the problem would be to reject empty relations on the API side. But that still requires fixing the editors first. Maybe something for API 0.7. Sarah ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:28:54PM +0100, MP wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:05:29 +0100, Ed Loach wrote: Relations without members can be used intentionally, Can you give an example, please? Because I've tried and failed to think of any. Perhaps I'm just getting hung up on the name relation as something which groups its related members in some way defined by the relation's tags (while not being used as a category). For example in Prague there is relation for transport network which contain empty relation for some tram lines - those are not operational currently due to some constructions, but once these constructions are finished, they can be easily restored to previous state (just dig up some older version of the relation from history, check it and save it) You might just as well delete the relation while the tram line does not exist. You are still able to restore an old version from the history later. There is no difference in the process. Relations should not be used as a garbage dump for information that might be interesting in the future. Sarah ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Hi, On 17 July 2011 23:55, Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de wrote: I recently stumbled upon some empty route relations, so I had a closer look at the OSM planet and found that there are about 10.000 orphaned relations in the database and the number is growing. With orphaned I mean relations that have no members and are not member of any other relation. Some are completely empty but most still have some tags. I have created a list of the relations sorted by last editing user here: ... Question remains what to do with the existing orphaned relations. Is there any legimate use for them or would it be save to simply delete them all? So I had stumbled on the same fact about a year ago and after some discussion on this list I deleted about 8000 empty/orphaned relations. It seems all except a handful of those 8000 relations had indeed been left in the not-deleted state by mistake. There were a couple (5) that had still been referenced from the wiki, rather than from inside the database through other relations. I got a couple of e-mails months later asking about those relations and undeleted them, it would probably be a good idea to check for references in the wiki beforehand this time. I don't think it makes sense to create such empty relations before any members are added to them because it's quite likely someone else is going to create a duplicate, but I don't have a strong opinion and being in the losing position as an author of an automated edit I didn't want to argue with the creators of these relations. Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On mardi 19 juillet 2011 at 00:54, Jorge Gustavo wrote : I remove my orphaned relations, using JOSM. 1) wget http://jxapi.openstreetmap.org/xapi/api/0.6/relation[boundary=administrat ive][@uid=193530] -O old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm 2) JOSM - Open - old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm No need to download each relation manually before opening in JOSM, JOSM can download an object by ID (type Ctrl-Shift-O, or from the File menu), and recent versions of JOSM even accept a list of IDs to download them all at once. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On Tuesday, July 19, 2011 10:42:06 AM UTC-5, Renaud MICHEL wrote: On mardi 19 juillet 2011 at 00:54, Jorge Gustavo wrote : I remove my orphaned relations, using JOSM. 1) wget http://jxapi.openstreetmap.org/xapi/api/0.6/relation[boundary=administrat ive][@uid=193530] -O old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm 2) JOSM - Open - old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm No need to download each relation manually before opening in JOSM, JOSM can download an object by ID (type Ctrl-Shift-O, or from the File menu), and recent versions of JOSM even accept a list of IDs to download them all at once. That query downloads all relations tagged with boundary=administrative and with a specific user id, not a single relation. To retrieve a single relation use something like http://jxapi.openstreetmap.org/xapi/api/0.6/relation/123456 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On 19-07-2011 16:42, Renaud MICHEL wrote: On mardi 19 juillet 2011 at 00:54, Jorge Gustavo wrote : I remove my orphaned relations, using JOSM. 1) wget http://jxapi.openstreetmap.org/xapi/api/0.6/relation[boundary=administrat ive][@uid=193530] -O old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm 2) JOSM - Open - old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm No need to download each relation manually before opening in JOSM, JOSM can download an object by ID (type Ctrl-Shift-O, or from the File menu), and recent versions of JOSM even accept a list of IDs to download them all at once. Hi Renaud, I didn't download each relation. I've downloaded all relations (more than 300) with the boundary=administrative and uid=193530. I don't know how to do such a request (filtered download) within JOSM. Is it possible? Regards, Jorge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 10:01:24 +0200, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:28:54PM +0100, MP wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:05:29 +0100, Ed Loach wrote: Relations without members can be used intentionally, Can you give an example, please? Because I've tried and failed to think of any. Perhaps I'm just getting hung up on the name relation as something which groups its related members in some way defined by the relation's tags (while not being used as a category). For example in Prague there is relation for transport network which contain empty relation for some tram lines - those are not operational currently due to some constructions, but once these constructions are finished, they can be easily restored to previous state (just dig up some older version of the relation from history, check it and save it) You might just as well delete the relation while the tram line does not exist. You are still able to restore an old version from the history later. There is no difference in the process. Relations should not be used as a garbage dump for information that might be interesting in the future. Yes - if you remember the ID. If you don't, finding the ID can be almost impossible (there is no simple way to search for deleted given its tags) Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Sarah wrote: I have created a list of the relations sorted by last editing user here: http://osm.lonvia.de/stuff/orphans.html snip Question remains what to do with the existing orphaned relations. Is there any legimate use for them or would it be save to simply delete them all? I've just deleted the empty one that my name was against (392063). It looks like I didn't delete it properly when I found that a relation had been created by another user at the same time (dmgroom 392062) for the same boundary (we were working on Haiti boundaries at the time). It is 392062 which is documented on the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti/Status/Boundari es/Nord With regards the others, I suspect relations with no members *should* be safe to delete. Probably. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Sarah Hoffmann wrote: With orphaned I mean relations that have no members and are not member of any other relation. Some are completely empty but most still have some tags. I have created a list of the relations sorted by last editing user here: http://osm.lonvia.de/stuff/orphans.html Hmmm, I seem to have a fair amount. Can I have a list of all the IDs last edited by me (NE2)? -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Orphaned-Relations-tp6592813p6593846.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Now there was me thinking it was just a Potlatch problem. I'll delete my 5 as soon as P2 has the facility (and I can find it). If someone wants to delete all of them that haven't been touched for (say) three months, I don't think there'd be any objections. Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
It's possible that some relations were unintentionally emptied of their members. In some editors, that would make these relations then invisible. For some of these relations, someone would have noticed something missing and then recreated the relation. For others, the emptying might need to be reverted. It might help if we can have the bbox's of these relations just before their members were deleted so that local mappers can determine if the relations were meant to be deleted or if these relations need to be reverted. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de wrote: Hi, I recently stumbled upon some empty route relations, so I had a closer look at the OSM planet and found that there are about 10.000 orphaned relations in the database and the number is growing. With orphaned I mean relations that have no members and are not member of any other relation. Some are completely empty but most still have some tags. I have created a list of the relations sorted by last editing user here: http://osm.lonvia.de/stuff/orphans.html Quite a few of those have been created by some import gone wrong but there is also a significant part that are the result of editing mistakes. Some relations seem to have been uploaded empty in the first place. In some relations, especially multipolygons, the member ways were deleted but the relation was left in the DB. And then there seem to be some users that think that removing all members from a relation is the same as deleting the relation. According to the created_by tag, this seems to be a problem in all major editors: 4188 JOSM 1614 Potlach 1 1565 Potlach 2 55 Merkaartor 2 Mapzen Beta 2671 (bots and scripts) I don't know about forbitting orphaned relations but it would certainly be helpful if the editors would show a big red warning sign if somebody tries to upload an empty relation. Question remains what to do with the existing orphaned relations. Is there any legimate use for them or would it be save to simply delete them all? Cheers, Sarah ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
2011/7/17 Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de: Question remains what to do with the existing orphaned relations. Is there any legimate use for them or would it be save to simply delete them all? I would ask the last editors to verify them, and let them delete those in the case they are not needed. I suspect that some of these relations actually were emptied without the mapper wanting it, so there might be cases where relation should be reverted to the version before (but this would have to be checked, maybe in the meantime someone will have created a new relation). I'd think that it is save to delete unused empty relations which are in version 1 or which never had any members and have not been used. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Richard Mann wrote: Now there was me thinking it was just a Potlatch problem. I'll delete my 5 as soon as P2 has the facility (and I can find it). You can delete a relation in P2 by selecting it in the Advanced view (which means you'll have to have selected a member of that relation, of course) and choosing 'Delete relation' in the little pop-up menu next to it. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Orphaned-Relations-tp6592813p6594275.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Sarah Hoffmann wrote: I don't know about forbitting orphaned relations but it would certainly be helpful if the editors would show a big red warning sign if somebody tries to upload an empty relation. No. That would be entirely disproportionate. Empty relations don't do anyone any harm. Big red warnings put off novice users. If you really care about empty relations, you are welcome to submit a patch to P2 that automatically deletes relations when they're set to 0 members (and undeletes them if you undo that action), of course! cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Orphaned-Relations-tp6592813p6594281.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Hi, On 07/18/11 12:05, M?rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: I would ask the last editors to verify them, and let them delete those in the case they are not needed. I suspect that some of these relations actually were emptied without the mapper wanting it, so there might be cases where relation should be reverted to the version before (but this would have to be checked, maybe in the meantime someone will have created a new relation). Then again, in many cases the last editor will probably not know anything and might have a hard time even understanding your question! I'd think that it is save to delete unused empty relations which are in version 1 or which never had any members and have not been used. I'd be tempted to delete them all if they're older than 3 months or so. Some of you said that it might have been something valuable accidentally deleted, but if nobody noticed that within 3 months then it cannot have been *so* valuable. (And if it was, it has likely been recreated already.) Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Found it (on the third attempt - it was accessed via that tiny down arrow button). Could it be somewhere on the Edit Relation dialog too, please, since that's where you'll be once you've loaded it... Richard On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Richard Mann wrote: Now there was me thinking it was just a Potlatch problem. I'll delete my 5 as soon as P2 has the facility (and I can find it). You can delete a relation in P2 by selecting it in the Advanced view (which means you'll have to have selected a member of that relation, of course) and choosing 'Delete relation' in the little pop-up menu next to it. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Orphaned-Relations-tp6592813p6594275.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
2011/7/18 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net: If you really care about empty relations, you are welcome to submit a patch to P2 that automatically deletes relations when they're set to 0 members (and undeletes them if you undo that action), of course! you could have empty relations (no own members) with tags on them that are themselves member of another relation and therefore usefull/intended without their own members. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:51 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/7/18 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net: If you really care about empty relations, you are welcome to submit a patch to P2 that automatically deletes relations when they're set to 0 members (and undeletes them if you undo that action), of course! you could have empty relations (no own members) with tags on them that are themselves member of another relation and therefore usefull/intended without their own members. True, though Sarah did define orphaned relations as relations that have no members and are not member[s] of any other relation. Though I'd still say relations without members (but children of other relations) are meaningless and don't belong in OSM as they contain no geographic information. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Sarah Hoffmann writes: Question remains what to do with the existing orphaned relations. Is there any legimate use for them or would it be save to simply delete them all? Since the only way to access them would be directly, as relations, it seems unlikely that they would ever be used again. I say to delete them. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Josh Doe wrote: On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:51 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: you could have empty relations (no own members) with tags on them that are themselves member of another relation and therefore usefull/intended without their own members. True, though Sarah did define orphaned relations as relations that have no members and are not member[s] of any other relation. Though I'd still say relations without members (but children of other relations) are meaningless and don't belong in OSM as they contain no geographic information. Relations without members can be associated with geographic information via their parents and are not inherently meaningless. The relations described by Sarah are probably errors. Relations without members can be used intentionally, and while they might not be your preferred way of modelling a certain fact, deleting them should not be considered. -- Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Relations without members can be used intentionally, Can you give an example, please? Because I've tried and failed to think of any. Perhaps I'm just getting hung up on the name relation as something which groups its related members in some way defined by the relation's tags (while not being used as a category). Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Hi Sarah, On Sonntag, 17. Juli 2011, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: I recently stumbled upon some empty route relations, so I had a closer look at the OSM planet and found that there are about 10.000 orphaned relations in the database and the number is growing. With orphaned I mean relations that have no members and are not member of any other relation. Some are completely empty but most still have some tags. I have created a list of the relations sorted by last editing user here: http://osm.lonvia.de/stuff/orphans.html I'm running a similar analyses on the planet. Here are my results: http://www.h- renrew.de/h/osm/osmchecks/02_Relationstypen/empty_relations.html And the wiki article about it: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Empty_relations From time to time I'm talking to creators of empty relations or clean them up carefully. There are quite a few relations which lost there member by accident. This relations need to be restored. Regards Werner ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Hi NE2, On Montag, 18. Juli 2011, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Sarah Hoffmann wrote: With orphaned I mean relations that have no members and are not member of any other relation. Some are completely empty but most still have some tags. I have created a list of the relations sorted by last editing user here: http://osm.lonvia.de/stuff/orphans.html Hmmm, I seem to have a fair amount. Can I have a list of all the IDs last edited by me (NE2)? You can use the list from my page: http://www.h- renrew.de/h/osm/osmchecks/02_Relationstypen/empty_relations.html It's the empty_relations.txt link. Regards Werner ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 03:59:23AM -0700, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Sarah Hoffmann wrote: I don't know about forbitting orphaned relations but it would certainly be helpful if the editors would show a big red warning sign if somebody tries to upload an empty relation. No. That would be entirely disproportionate. Empty relations don't do anyone any harm. Big red warnings put off novice users. No they don't do any harm. However, if close to 1% of relations in the database are empty, then it's about time to ask why there are so many of them. The main issue here is that most users are probably not even aware that they have produced empty relations. They delete members, upload the data and next time they download the same area the relation is gone. The obvious but wrong conclusion of your novice user is that the relation has been deleted and all is well. That is not very nice from an UI design point of view either. So, there is certainly room for improvement in the editors. Personally, I prefer if my editor tells me if I mess up a relation but if it fits better into P2's philosophy to silently delete empty relations then that works just as well. If you really care about empty relations, you are welcome to submit a patch to P2 that automatically deletes relations when they're set to 0 members (and undeletes them if you undo that action), of course! Wouldn't it be much easier to silently delete all empty relations when uploading the data? From a user point of view the result should be the same and you don't have to mess around with undo. Sarah ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Sarah Hoffmann wrote: Wouldn't it be much easier to silently delete all empty relations when uploading the data? From a user point of view the result should be the same and you don't have to mess around with undo. It would certainly be easier, but I don't believe it's the Right Way To Do It. Conceptually, the upload code should simply get the 'dirty' elements from P2's internal storage, and upload them. I don't like to put any additional logic into the upload code. Further discussion of this point probably belongs on potlatch-dev@. :) cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On 18 July 2011 23:15, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I'd be tempted to delete them all if they're older than 3 months or so. Some of you said that it might have been something valuable accidentally deleted, but if nobody noticed that within 3 months then it cannot have been *so* valuable. (And if it was, it has likely been recreated already.) +1 sounds reasonable. i deleted the empty relation i created -- robin http://bumblepuppy.org/blog/?p=237 - government bill to remove basic human rights in NZ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:05:29 +0100, Ed Loach wrote: Relations without members can be used intentionally, Can you give an example, please? Because I've tried and failed to think of any. Perhaps I'm just getting hung up on the name relation as something which groups its related members in some way defined by the relation's tags (while not being used as a category). For example in Prague there is relation for transport network which contain empty relation for some tram lines - those are not operational currently due to some constructions, but once these constructions are finished, they can be easily restored to previous state (just dig up some older version of the relation from history, check it and save it) There are quite rare uses for empty relation (but being a member of other relation) and mostly these uses are temporary. Since if you download some data by some given bbox, you will get that empty relation (along with some other data). But relations that contain no members and themselves are not members of nay other relation are invisible - they are not contained in any bounding box, they do not affect rendering, routing or anything and basically you can download them only by ID (or parse them from planet dump). So these are basically useless Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
Hi Sarah, hi all, Thanks for pointing out the problem. In my case, there were orphaned relations without any use at all. They simply were not removed after cleaning some administrative boundaries and I didn't noticed. I remove my orphaned relations, using JOSM. 1) wget http://jxapi.openstreetmap.org/xapi/api/0.6/relation[boundary=administrative][@uid=193530] -O old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm 2) JOSM - Open - old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm 3) JOSM - Select All 4) JOSM - Delete 5) JOSM - Upload Relations deleted! Regards, Jorge On 17-07-2011 22:55, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: Hi, I recently stumbled upon some empty route relations, so I had a closer look at the OSM planet and found that there are about 10.000 orphaned relations in the database and the number is growing. With orphaned I mean relations that have no members and are not member of any other relation. Some are completely empty but most still have some tags. I have created a list of the relations sorted by last editing user here: http://osm.lonvia.de/stuff/orphans.html Quite a few of those have been created by some import gone wrong but there is also a significant part that are the result of editing mistakes. Some relations seem to have been uploaded empty in the first place. In some relations, especially multipolygons, the member ways were deleted but the relation was left in the DB. And then there seem to be some users that think that removing all members from a relation is the same as deleting the relation. According to the created_by tag, this seems to be a problem in all major editors: 4188 JOSM 1614 Potlach 1 1565 Potlach 2 55 Merkaartor 2 Mapzen Beta 2671 (bots and scripts) I don't know about forbitting orphaned relations but it would certainly be helpful if the editors would show a big red warning sign if somebody tries to upload an empty relation. Question remains what to do with the existing orphaned relations. Is there any legimate use for them or would it be save to simply delete them all? Cheers, Sarah ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
