[cross-posted to talk-us@ and tagging@, please choose your follow-ups wisely]
Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
> It seems that we are increasingly doing things to simplify the
> model because certain tooling can't handle the real level of
> complexity that exists in the real world. I'm in favor of
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020, at 18:06, Clay Smalley wrote:
> Many long-distance Amtrak trains have route relations with 1000+
> members. If I split one way that happens to be a member of one of these
> routes, I end up with a changeset with a gigantic bounding box, and
> often get edit conflicts due to
It seems that OSM has a an architectural problem with over-large relations?
>
+1
The Tongass National Forest [1] was recently mapped with great detail. It
comprises most of the Alaska panhandle and all of its islands and inlets.
The relation has 28,000 members and contains over 2 million nodes.
It seems that OSM has a an architectural problem with over-large relations?
Is modifying the relations in potentially arbitrary ways a good solution?
Seeking something that may work now, can any "size-based" relation
splits be done in a way that they can be automatically removed at some
I posted this on the Slack but I figured I should put this on the mailing
list to make sure it reaches everybody:
Many long-distance Amtrak trains have route relations with 1000+ members.
If I split one way that happens to be a member of one of these routes, I
end up with a changeset with a
5 matches
Mail list logo
