On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 12:14 +0100, Robert Vollmert wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2008, at 22:10, Jon Burgess wrote:
>
> Thanks for the information! It's becoming clear why things are the
> way they are currently.
>
> > How about we define this as a new relation type and depreciate the
> > multipolygon type.
>
> Which would take us right back to the beginning of the thread :).
No. It would get you buy in for an approach which should deliver the
ultimate result you want without breaking everything in the interim.
During the 0.4->0.5 transition period there were scripts to convert .osm
files to the new format which allowed tools to be developed and tested
before the new format went live. This may be an appropriate compromise
if you still object to using a new relation type.
Don't get me wrong, I think the proposals are an improvement over the
old system but I don't think we can just replace it overnight and expect
everything to magically work like it does today.
Jon
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
