On Fri, 2023-01-06 at 11:50 +0100, Sören Reinecke wrote: > To sum up: Coordinates can be used in the same wrong way as OSM id as > they're both not sufficient enough for the use case most people are > using it (indirectly). Coordinates are already part of the 'geo' URI > scheme. There is no visible reason to me why adding another unstable > identifier like the osm id is a bad idea. As long as OSM ids are used > in > a dynamic and not in a hardcoded way and proberly updated by the > tools > people are using to retrieve these data (e.g. Overpass, Sophox or > end-user apps like OrganicMaps) 'geo' uris are always generated by > tools. If some does that manually then this person is in charge to > change that when the physical position of the POI changes too. People > tend to forget about these little urls as long as they don't see a > GUI > (graphical user interface) connected to it like a map on their > website.
Good point. Also consider that OSM ids have an advantage over coordinates, because if an OSM object gets deleted then a query for that id will return "Not found". That in itself is valuable information to a data consumer. I really don't understand why anybody would make that into some kind of Pandora's box that must not be opened. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk