Pieren gmail.com> writes:
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Kirill Bestoujev gmail.com>
wrote:
> > I think it is better to try to persuade
> > mappers from those countries to create the border in way everyone does.
>
> No. If we created this super-relation in France, it is because the
> ori
Le 26/08/2011 17:07, Frederik Ramm a écrit :
Hi,
Phil! Gold wrote:
Why is this so logical? The exact same data can be derived from the
intersection of the sets of elements in the two countries'
(single-level)
border relations.
Put yourself in the position of having to create or maintain th
Hi,
Phil! Gold wrote:
Why is this so logical? The exact same data can be derived from the
intersection of the sets of elements in the two countries' (single-level)
border relations.
Put yourself in the position of having to create or maintain them.
Creation:
Cascading relations: You creat
* Frederik Ramm [2011-08-26 15:33 +0200]:
> I think it is only logical to group all ways making up the border
> with country A in one relation, and those making up the border with
> country B in another, and so on.
Why is this so logical? The exact same data can be derived from the
intersection
Ok, convinced.
Kirill
On 26.08.2011 17:57, Pieren wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Kirill Bestoujev wrote:
And Regarding the complexity - Russian border is 5 (or even more) times
longer than French, but still we do not split it into pieces...
It's not a problem of distance or amount
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Kirill Bestoujev wrote:
>
> And Regarding the complexity - Russian border is 5 (or even more) times
> longer than French, but still we do not split it into pieces...
>
It's not a problem of distance or amount of nodes but a problem of
amount of 'ways members' . In
Hi,
On 08/26/11 15:16, Kirill Bestoujev wrote:
could you please explain why do you need to keep France border in the
way it is now? What is the purpose?
I see no benefits of such a structure, could you show them to me?
I think the benefits are obvious.
An average country will have a number o
Piren,
good to hear you have a tool for that. I'll try to get it and adopt it
to my needs (but I already see a problem - I have no python installed on
the server where I need to use this tool.)
And Regarding the complexity - Russian border is 5 (or even more) times
longer than French, but st
Vincent,
could you please explain why do you need to keep France border in the
way it is now? What is the purpose?
I see no benefits of such a structure, could you show them to me?
K.
On 26.08.2011 16:40, Vincent Pottier wrote:
Le 26/08/2011 14:23, Kirill Bestoujev a écrit :
Hi,
I have t
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Kirill Bestoujev wrote:
> I think it is better to try to persuade
> mappers from those countries to create the border in way everyone does.
No. If we created this super-relation in France, it is because the
original single relation became simply too big for normal
Le 26/08/2011 14:23, Kirill Bestoujev a écrit :
Hi,
I have the same problem, there are two countries with
relation-relation borders - France and Guadelupa, I think it is better
to try to persuade mappers from those countries to create the border
in way everyone does.
Or not...
Kirill
...An
Hi,
I have the same problem, there are two countries with relation-relation
borders - France and Guadelupa, I think it is better to try to persuade
mappers from those countries to create the border in way everyone does.
Kirill
On 26.08.2011 15:58, Aurélien FILEZ wrote:
Hi list,
I found too
Hi list,
I found tools to make a file in polygon filter file format from an OSM
relation, like rel2poly or osm2poly.
The problem is when a relation is built using others relations, these tools
does not seems to support that.
France borders is an example of this king of relation :
http://www.open
13 matches
Mail list logo
