Frederik Ramm wrote: >Sent: 07 April 2008 1:52 AM >To: Richard Fairhurst >Cc: Talk Openstreetmap >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Relations not always brilliant > >Hi, > >> > If you simply use the "ref" tag to specify the road number, how would >> > you then use the API to access all ways making up B4027? >> >> By using OSMXAPI: http://www.informationfreeway.org/api/0.5/way >> [ref=B4027] > >Which will omit anything tagged "ref=B4027;B4028" or some such. Ok you >said there shouldn't be any of those in the UK anyway so I guess >you're fine... > >> That the mainstream API doesn't do it is (if it's deemed useful) a >> deficiency in the API, not a reason to add duplicate data. > >I think it is a good idea to group objects that belong together in a >relation. Ultimately I'd expect the relation to carry the "ref=B4027" >tag and to drop that tag from the ways contained therein. Makes a lot >of sense from a data modelling viewpoint I think.
I think its a leap of faith to think that we will even get to the position were the relationship alone holds the grouped data, such as ref. I see that there will always likely be duplication in this regard with the same information being held on the component parts as well as the relationship. I dont see this as a bad thing, the components may have equal applicability and use as the overall object, especially in different applications. Cheers Andy > >Agreed that we're not there yet but it is a good thing to aim at. I >fully expect most ways to be part of one or more relations some time in >the future so why not get used to it. > >Bye >Frederik > >-- >Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > >_______________________________________________ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
