On 30 July 2010 03:04, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: >> If the tlids represent "the original set of data from >> which the bridge might have come", then it's best off in the history. > > And sticking with the theme of "creating a general solution" rather > than "maintaining kludgy tiger-specific hacks", maybe we could
It's not tiger specific to be specific. If anybody wants to find correspondences between OSM objects and USGS objects and store in the db then I really believe it's useful information. We can't help having many databases on the internet referring to / describing the same real objects, so let's at least order the mess. That's also why it's not best stored in the object's history -- the same osm object may come to describe a different real world object after some edits. Cheers _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us