On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) < ajrli...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Any reason why we don't just put the bugs in osm. They could be nodes, ways > or polygons and just have a suitable bug=description key value pair plus > any > other tags need (date opened/closed etc). I accept that the editors would > need to handle the data a little differently and their might be a need to > track closed (visible=false or perhaps a new visible=closed). Plus the API > would need to able to deliver just the bug data for the API rather than the > whole dataset for the bbox. > > It seems daft to me to go reinventing everything when we have all the tolls > already. > -1 I see bugs data as similar to the GPX traces. It should be on a separate layer with separate database tables, etc. I agree that we don't need to reinvent everything (we can reuse components of the OSM stack) but as Shaun said, bug data should be separate from the real data. Existing tools should not be retrofitted to ignore such bug info.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
