Richard,
On 11/09/2010 01:23 AM, Richard Palmer wrote:
I can continue to do this using a standalone copy of the OSM database
but would prefer it to be made available for other people to
improve and add to.
There are three reasons not to do this:
1. Mappers are not used to working with data like that - if they see
that a shop is gone they will delete the shop, rather than researching
when it closed and adding an appropriate end_date.
2. Our software cannot handle such data very well at the moment; ideally
you'd wish for editors and/or the API to filter out irrelevant stuff so
that someone mapping a present-day is not fazed by ancient Roman roads.
The stat_date/end_date or other lifecycle concepts (search the Wiki for
that word) are also not sufficient to describe what historians will want
- they cannot for example model something moving from one place to
another through history.
3. Our infrastucture might be unduly burdened by all the extra load.
All these things could be fixed with time if there was sufficient
interest but it will require a lot of work and perseverance.
For now, I suggest that you keep your separate database. You can link
your objects to OSM objects by their ID if you want, and process the
daily change files to be alerted of changes in the objects of interest
to you.
Bye
Frederik
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
