On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Stefan Keller <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Anthony, hi all > > 2011/8/21 Anthony <[email protected]>: >> These are the kinds of things that people are going to maintain in >> OSM. Whereas external_link:HCPA=376284734 is not. > > Given there is an organisation like the museum (in the proposal) then > there *is* a community which would take care of whatever is needed to > keep the relationships between the OSM and the external db up-to-date.
I don't deny that at all. I'm just saying the right place to keep those relationships is in the external db, and not in OSM. (I explained why, but it seems you didn't understand my explanation.) > but you probably thougt of other use cases where there in fact was no > one interested to maintain imported stuff. No. > So I agree with you: The disadvantages and requirements outweigh the > current concept of maintaining OMM as a separate (meta-)database. You don't agree with me. I said the exact opposite. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
