Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 21.08.2014, 19:20 +0100 schrieb Dave F.: > http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=18159&_noCache=on > > This route relation appears to be just for the B3070. Isn't that a waste > of time as it's covered by the ref tags on the ways? > > I thought route relations were a way to allow tagging of journeys taken > over numerous types of ways. Any reason why I shouldn't delete it?
They are used to describe infrastructure, too. Currently there are 85000 relations of that kind in the database. (10000 in DE, only 100 in UK) Often the type=route route=road have extra tags like operator, full name, wikipedia/data link, ... The relation builds a single object for a specific road http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20884 Personally, for roads with lower importance, like the B3070 I wouldn't create extra relations. http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18159 In other mails I've seen the ref discussion again. Should it be only on the way or on the relation? While it is redundant to place it on both, it helps to do QA tasks like missing segments, wrong elements, wrong ref, ... "Relations are not Categories" discussion: Whenever this page is cited I'm wondering how would you identify the specific "category" with a database request? just my 2 cents. This one looks like a bad relation, anyone likes to delete it? http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2621325 Regards Werner (werner2101) _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
