Hi, In general is seems like it might be useful to have some kind of somewhat permanent URL to an element inside of OSM. However, given what exists today shouldn't Wikipedia be using the overpass API for referencing OSM?
Thanks Jason. On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Paul Norman <penor...@mac.com> wrote: >> From: andrzej zaborowski [mailto:balr...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 2:08 PM >> To: Frederik Ramm >> Cc: OpenStreetMap >> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM relation ID property in Wikidata >> >> > I am less concerned about the Wikidata side - if they make a bad >> > judgement then it is their mess to clean up. I am however concerned >> > that if more people simply assume that the status quo is there to stay >> > ("IDs are stable enough"), this will put pressure on *us* and limit >> > our flexibility in the future. >> >> The OSMF has sent a pretty strong message saying that object IDs are >> stable enough to base impactful legal decisions on them. It will look >> silly for them to go back to the stance that IDs aren't stable after >> all. > > There's two sides to ID stability. One is stability during software or data > model changes and the other is stability during normal mapping. Frederik's > post was concerned more with the former. > > The latter is more complicated. Because the original message linked to > London, it's worth pointing out that a few admin relations did get new IDs > in the redaction process for technical reasons and that periodically > relations get given new IDs because old large complex relations don't > interact well with the /history call. > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
