Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

sent from a phone > Am 07.11.2015 um 13:49 schrieb Dave Swarthout : > > . It has three or four relations, provincial, 2 wood multipolygons, and a > river) sharing ways along an international boundary. Trying to separate one > of those wood multipolygons (so it can be

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > @Colin - I see it now in Wiktionary, but since it is not in the OSM Wiki > how would renderers show or use that information? I guess my point is that > the relation manager and tools are difficult to master and

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

Hi, Am 2015-11-06 um 11:24 schrieb Paul Johnson: > […] > *The fix: * I propose a goal of December 31, 2016 to eliminate ref=* as a > method to describe an overlying route; this should be more than ample time > for existing data consumers to catch up on doing a move and ensure data > consistency

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:56 PM, David Marchal wrote: > ___ > > > > On 06/11/2015 10:24, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > Obviously in places where a road can have multiple equivalent > > references (such as the US) route relations perfect sense (as does >

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

>OK, well, in JOSM at least, using the Relation Toolbox is snappy simple You cannot be serious, Paul. There is a relation here in Thailand, a super-relation?, that I've been wanting to edit for months. It has three or four relations, provincial, 2 wood multipolygons, and a river) sharing ways

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

Paul Johnson wrote: > You're blaming the community for a software issue here, and that's a > little unfair to the community. If iD or potlatch or whatever are that > broken, then fucking fix iD and Potlatch. Firstly, you are not helping your cause by being so gratuitously offensive, though I

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > Am 07.11.2015 um 13:49 schrieb Dave Swarthout : > > > > . It has three or four relations, provincial, 2 wood multipolygons, and > a river) sharing ways along

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 6:49 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > >OK, well, in JOSM at least, using the Relation Toolbox is snappy simple > > You cannot be serious, Paul. There is a relation here in Thailand, a > super-relation?, that I've been wanting to edit for months. It has

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

sent from a phone > Am 07.11.2015 um 22:31 schrieb Richard Fairhurst : > > To do it properly and > lessen the chance of multiple relations being accidentally created for the > same route (as continues to happen with NCN routes in the UK and elsewhere), > it will need

Re: [Tagging] RFC level:ref (was: Adding floor location information)

I created an RFC page for level:ref. I look forward to your comments. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/level:ref PS: I will create it’s cousins, addr:unit:ref later. having the directory/information map

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On 11/7/15 6:02 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > sent from a phone > >> Am 07.11.2015 um 22:31 schrieb Richard Fairhurst : >> >> To do it properly and >> lessen the chance of multiple relations being accidentally created for the >> same route (as continues to happen with

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

sent from a phone > Am 08.11.2015 um 05:47 schrieb Richard Welty : > > otherwise > you get into relations that you can barely if at all load into an editor. +1, also the risk of a conflict on upload is higher for big relations cheers Martin