Am Mittwoch, den 09.07.2008, 12:21 +0200 schrieb Frederik Ramm: > It seems obvious that areas, like ways, need to be based on a > sequence > of nodes. (If you were to base them on ways, then that would be > nothing > different from today's relations, would it?)
No, thats not obvious. You can use this argument to model ways as relations, too. The _main_ problem with areas as ways is IMHO that they introduce an enormous amount of redundancy. A road that is the boundary between farmland and forest has three (partial) ways now. These need to be kept in sync. This will not work. In the long run, this redundant informantion will turn into contradictory information. Eg. someone will add a node to the way and move it a bit according to his gpx tracks, thereby falsely moving a part of the road into the forest. This could be solved by areas that only reference ways instead of duplicating them, this will however not be easy to get right. Sincerely, Joachim _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
