On 10-10-12 10:41 PM, Matthias Julius wrote
Maybe less ugly would be to have nodes just contain lat and lon and
introduce new point elements that need to reference a node.
That would also make it easier to put two different objects at the same
spot (like a mail box on a lamp post) as added benefit.
+1 for such a separation of responsibilities of nodes and point features.
IMO this would also be beneficial for line and polygon features.
Features should be cleanly separated from their geometries, which is not
currently the case. This can be done in such a way that the topological
integrity remains intact.
As proposed by Matthias, one point feature would reference one node. A
linestring feature would reference one or more consecutive ways, whereas
a polygon feature would reference one or more closed sets of ways (also
called 'rings', one exterior, zero or more interior rings). Maybe
geometric aggregates (set of disjoint geometries) should be allowed as
well, either homogeneous (multipoint, multilinestring, multipolygon), or
heterogeneious (multigeometry). That would be possible with this model
as well.
If this were to happen, it would also be easier to manage things like
bridges and (simple) routes. Now it is too often necessary to chop up
ways, use relations, etc., so that ways end up with a whole bunch of
tags. I find situations like this difficult to manage.
Probably there has already been plenty of discussion about this in the
past, but I think it would be worthwhile to discuss this further for a
future API version :)
Frank
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
