I looked at his other edits and I get the impression he's from Switzerland. Maybe things are done differently there.
Jo 2013/6/24 Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> > The wiki clearly describes that the relation=network should be used to > combine routes (walking, bus, ...) together. see > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Network > This "network" groups together single nodes. That's outside the scope. > > From a database design viewpoint, I understand that one wants to > "normalize" common attributes in a separate table. However, this is not the > way most things are done in OSM. We do not create a network of > Shell-tankstations, McDonalds restaurants or BMW-dealers. > > I would contact the mapper and ask him on which basis he thinks that we > should create relations like this. > > regards > > m > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be> wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> Been looking at this relation today : 271476 ( see >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/271476 ) >> >> It has an amenity set, but these points are widely spread out, I think >> this goes against the intended idea behind amenity's. >> >> Any comments ? >> >> Glenn >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-be mailing list >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
