Hi,
Thank you for your response.
>> I believe Richard F has made comments in the past that we shouldn't
do this
Well, I don't know about the discussion yet, maybe you could give me a
hint for which subject to search for?
I just want to mention, that for Wikipedia there exists an analysis
about the conceptual (=meaning) stability their URLs[1]:
> 90% of Wikipedia URLs are stable identifiers, and a further ~5%
change in meaning only slightly. (Figure 2)[1]
So I am eager to know what the counter arguments were :)
Anyway, the reason I ask is: if someone did this analysis (and maybe the
implementation of a tool for persistent ids) for OpenStreetMap as a part
of his master thesis, would he be doing duplicate work (as maybe there
are already plans for creating such system)? and if so: where can I find
related work?
If there are no plans yet, could anyone who is aware of discussions on
this topic give me some pointers?
Thank you in advance and cheers,
Claus
[1] Hepp et. al, Harvesting Wiki Consensus - Using Wikipedia Entries as
Ontology Elements, ESWC 2006
On 08/01/2011 03:39 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
3) Why people intentionally destroy ids, and whether there are better
ways of achieving their goals?
(I seem to recall someone explaining that sometimes objects are
deleted and recreated in order to discard the change history,
particularly for large relations.)
It would definitely be valuable to have the identifiers be more
persistent. I've been linking to some from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Keefe_Rail_Trail . I believe Richard
F has made comments in the past that we shouldn't do this, and we
should have explicit persistent identifiers instead, but there is no
support for that yet.
Steve
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
