Hi, Steve Hill wrote: > I've been thinking about ways to improve the way objects are tagged in OSM > - for a long time I've seen some problems with the way we currently tag > things, and I finally got around to writing down some of my thoughts on > the subject.
I *had* been wondering; we had the usual recurring left-right tagging discussion but the bi-monthly Absolutely New And Improved Tagging Scheme was overdue for a while. Thanks for jumping in and helping us out ;-) Your concept is utterly unworkable of course with the current software landscape, but if we leave that aside for a moment, then you do have an interesting point, in fact one that was raised by Jochen and myself in our April 2007 data model paper[1], back when we were still young and believed we could change the world. Quoting from that paper: "Instead of having a geometric object with some properties, we instead think of objects with some properties (like “this is a museum” and “this has the name Natural History Museum”) and the added property of “this object is positioned at such and such a location”. ... So the geometry is not the object itself, as it is now, but it is just one property of some kind of abstract object." I believe this is indeed the way many pros are doing it - there is an object and the geometry is one of many properties of the object. It is a concept to keep in mind for the more distant future; I don't think we should aim to do it with the current implementation of relations though. Bye Frederik [1] http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/towards-a-new-data-model-for-osm.pdf -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [email protected] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
