I have had a similar thought for the longer Federal Highways in
Brazil. Dividing them by state sounds sensible, as BR-101 reaches all
the way from the border to Uruguay in the south to the city of Recife
in Northeast. If my counting is right, that is 9 states. And there are
several other highways like that in Brazil.
brgds
Aun Johnsen
On 25/08/2010, at 12:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2010/8/25 Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com>:
Good question. Why are we putting roads into relations?
It adds useful redundancy, making it possible to find errors in a
route
(and, in the other direction, since it's easier to screw up a
relation than
ref tags, having ref tags helps with correction). It also adds
nonredundant
information for some one-way pairs, where the two directions use
different
two-way roads.
OK, but putting international roads all in one relation (the E45 is
4920 km long) is not required for this scope. If you think how often
we are splitting ways (bridges, maxspeed, turn_restrictions, oneway,
etc.) this would get to thousands of members hence lacking
transparency and being very vulnerable to editing conflicts.
You should split them in several smaller relations, e.g. per region
(and probably add those relations to super-relations as Konrad
suggested).
cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
