On 29 July 2010 19:12, Alan Mintz <alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net> wrote: > One responded that it was because they were sometimes wrong (which is, of > course, true, for those roads that we've corrected) and that they did not > seem to provide any useful data. However, they also contain the original > breakdown of the prefix, root, and suffix before they got combined into the > name and then expanded by the balrog-kun bot - information which will be > useful in the majority of cases if we ever get back to > splitting/standardizing.
The only tiger tag that is important to keep (to me) is the tiger:tlid, all the other values can be pulled from the original TIGER database provided the TLID. I can also see the argument for keeping the name segments as they are now largely used as generic tags, in the absence of some agreed non tiger: -prefixed tags. For the record I (balrog-kun) removed the tiger:upload_uuid on any ways that I touched back when I was expanding the names. This tag has no value whatsoever now that API 0.6 supports changesets (and even without it), but other ways still have the upload_uuid. The uuid is a quite long, random string so it occupied a very big part of the planet snapshots and made it very hard to for example build a search index of all the tag values including substrings (for example using suffix trees). I would recommend that sequential, integer ids are always used in databases like OSM, instead of UUIDs. Cheers _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
