Matt Amos wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Stefan de Konink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Matt Amos wrote: >>> i don't understand what you mean by a pyramid shape. the relations >>> would be returned in the same order, regardless of the role tag, >>> right? and you're not merging subtrees...? >> My proposal would be merging subtrees, so they can store an highway with >> 80km/h 100km/h zones in one relation as part of two subtrees (as >> optimalisation), or multiple subtrees for each zone found. > > very interesting... so are the subtrees explicitly merged (i.e: merged > subtrees are marked "deleted" and no longer individually addressable) > or implicitly (i.e: if A and B are subtrees of C, then i can ask for > A, B or C and update any one of them and see the changes reflected in > the other)?
This advanced relation stuff only in brains and on paper. But I wanted to take a completely different approach to versioning. I have asked the authors of the database software I use if it is possible to create a view based on a certain moment in time, what the database looks like at that time. (copy-on-write, is basically already what happens under the hood) In that case only *one* view needs to be maintained, and no application layer management. This is something I'll be working on later, the application; handler_osm is just a very good excuse to test things out with real life data. Stefan _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
