On 9 Nov 2008, at 03:48, Simon Ward wrote:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 12:02:22PM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote:You are now basically working around the actual problem. Allowing partial ways in the editors for the current bbox. I think hacking and breaking ways is bad, duplicate information, missing tags upon edit etc. I thinkstoring ways with their tags per 'new segment' is bad too; hence the reason I proposed to use an ordered relation to represent ways.I think I agree with this. Contributors or users of the data shouldn’t have to care at all about how big their ways (or other objects) can be.One of the main aims for OSM is that it is easy to contribute data, right? Stop making it more complex by introducing arbitrary limitsbecause of technical issues, especially ones that go away when you moveto better hardware or software. Start making things scalable. This probably means having partial ways as suggested.
Actually you will find that having a limit of 2000 nodes in a way will make osm more scaleable. It will make it easier to use osm data on mobile devices, and on devices with low memory. As it is if you try and edit a large way in one of the current editors, you will find it very slow.
Shaun
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
