On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Robert (Jamie) Munro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > David Earl wrote: > > On 04/08/2008 11:14, vegard wrote: > >> For naming of streets in cities, where properties change very often and > >> you have to make many small ways, it sometimes gets annoying that the > >> name is duplicated. > >> > >> I was wondering: How good/easy would it be to make a superway-relation > >> to fix that? I.e. group several ways for labeling-intentions? > >> > >> I'm no expert on the inner workings in either of the renderers, but to > >> me it sounds like a quick fix to a small annoyance. If someone that > >> knows the renderers could either agree or disagree, I'd be happy anyways > >> (well, obviously happier if they agree :) > > > > See > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Collected_Ways > > > > AFAIK this isn't rendered at present, so for the time being the names > > would have to appear on the ways themselves as well if you want to see > > them, but in principle, a renderer could take note of this, and if it > > becomes a widespread idiom, no doubt they will. > > I think that is a chicken and egg scenario. I think the renderers (and > namefinder) need to support it before people will start using it. Then > very quickly we could move all names (and refs and highway types...) to > relationships, and we would have a much cleaner data structure. > > Lots of wierd cases where part of a road has more than one ref, more > than one name, or more than one of any other property go away - the > relevant ways just become a member of more than one relationship. > > Personally, I believe that most tagging should be on relationships not > ways. Only small physical things like layer, bridge and tunnel should be > specified at a way level. > > Robert (Jamie) Munro > I think this is one point where the different data clients or consumers have different preferences. To my mind, you've got it backward. The "small physical things" like bridges and tunnels are the parts that should go into relations, because they have nothing to do with the physical continuity of the way. A routing app does not care about bridges and tunnels. However, your perspective is probably one of rendering, which would prefer to see the ways chopped up at bridges and tunnels. Karl
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
