Is there something we're overlooking about the current scheme?
You're perfectly right, the current scheme can't possibly work. Ever!
Did you get the impression that someone said that?
_
Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 02:18:04AM +, G H S wrote:
What Steve has proposed is what I would have expected. I can already see
adding a natural type, so I added a quick one to his page.
Objekts in the real world can't neatly be categorized into types. The
world is much more complicated than
Hi Jochen.
Objekts in the real world can't neatly be categorized into types. The
world is much more complicated than this. So OSM has a different
approach: We just have attributes of objects called tags. Tags tell you
*something about* an object, but they don't tell you what it *is*.
Or, if
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:24:55 +, G H S tiosan...@hotmail.com wrote:
Well, I'm not sure that the kind of objects found on a map can't be
categorized by a sufficiently flexible system.
Like
* objects belonging to multiple types?
* different ways of categorizing the same information?
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Sent: 20 February 2009 1:48 AM
To: Steve Hill
Cc: dev@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] Ponderings about an improved tagging scheme
Hi,
Steve Hill wrote:
Your concept is utterly unworkable of course with the current software
landscape,
Would you like to explain
Jochen Topf wrote:
Sent: 20 February 2009 8:41 AM
To: G H S
Cc: dev@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] Ponderings about an improved tagging scheme
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 02:18:04AM +, G H S wrote:
What Steve has proposed is what I would have expected. I can already see
adding
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, marcus.wolsc...@googlemail.com wrote:
Well, I'm not sure that the kind of objects found on a map can't be
categorized by a sufficiently flexible system.
Like
* objects belonging to multiple types?
This was already covered by the proposal (and is indeed one of the
Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com writes:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Sent: 20 February 2009 1:48 AM
To: Steve Hill
Cc: dev@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] Ponderings about an improved tagging scheme
Hi,
Steve Hill wrote:
Your concept is utterly unworkable of course
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 wouldn't mind some feedback on my ideas:
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
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Your concept is utterly unworkable of course with the current software
landscape,
Would you like to explain why it is utterly unworkable?
Instead of having a geometric object with some properties, we instead think
of objects with some properties
I'm just getting started here, so I don't want to offend any founding members
or dredge up a well beaten horse... BUT
Just looking through the data and some example tags, I was baffled as
to how the tags could be used effectively and consistently as they
stand today. They seem to have
Hi,
G H S wrote:
Is there something we're overlooking about the current scheme?
You're perfectly right, the current scheme can't possibly work. Ever!
Hold on, what's that... a map you say? From OSM data? Impossible ;-)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ##
13 matches
Mail list logo
