On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Dave F via Tagging <
tagg...@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> On 22/11/2020 11:24, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
>
> I sincerely hope "I'm in favor of fixing" translates as "I'm planning to
> fix", though I fear I may be disappointed.
>
> More broadly, we need to nip this "oh just fix the tools" stuff in the
> bud. (etc)
>
>
> Likewise we need to stop software developers from expecting contributors
> to add data purely because they can't be bothered/not competent enough to
> write a few lines of code. (OSM-carto demanding boundaries on ways &
> numerous routers expecting multiple foodways to criss-cross pedestrian
> areas, are just two examples)
>
> Contributing to the database (also *volunteers*) are expected to map to a
> certain standard. There shouldn't be a reason to expect develops not to do
> the same.
>
If it's so easy, why don't you write the "few lines of code" necessary to
fix this issue?
> Desiring relations to list in their entirety is *not* a "0.1% case".
> Splitting them into 'super relations' should not be the desired, final
> solution.
>
Amtrak routes, like many other public transit routes, are already split
into super-relations (see [1], [2]). This is a non-issue. I've already
decided to split up long-distance Amtrak routes into more manageable
chunks, especially since I'm the one who takes on most of the work of
managing them. My original question was *how* to split them up, not
*whether* to split them. I'm not convinced that attempts to persuade me not
to do so are helpful in any way, so I'm going to consider them off-topic
and ignore them.
-Clay
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route_master
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amtrak
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
