On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Dave F via Tagging < tagg...@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> On 22/11/2020 11:24, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > > I sincerely hope "I'm in favor of fixing" translates as "I'm planning to > fix", though I fear I may be disappointed. > > More broadly, we need to nip this "oh just fix the tools" stuff in the > bud. (etc) > > > Likewise we need to stop software developers from expecting contributors > to add data purely because they can't be bothered/not competent enough to > write a few lines of code. (OSM-carto demanding boundaries on ways & > numerous routers expecting multiple foodways to criss-cross pedestrian > areas, are just two examples) > > Contributing to the database (also *volunteers*) are expected to map to a > certain standard. There shouldn't be a reason to expect develops not to do > the same. > If it's so easy, why don't you write the "few lines of code" necessary to fix this issue? > Desiring relations to list in their entirety is *not* a "0.1% case". > Splitting them into 'super relations' should not be the desired, final > solution. > Amtrak routes, like many other public transit routes, are already split into super-relations (see [1], [2]). This is a non-issue. I've already decided to split up long-distance Amtrak routes into more manageable chunks, especially since I'm the one who takes on most of the work of managing them. My original question was *how* to split them up, not *whether* to split them. I'm not convinced that attempts to persuade me not to do so are helpful in any way, so I'm going to consider them off-topic and ignore them. -Clay [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route_master [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amtrak
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
