On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Jo <[email protected]> wrote: > The same is true for cycling and equestrian networks with numbered nodes. > There are a few of those networks in Germany as well. > These are not collections/categories. They are networks of route relations.
Well, you could do the same for all McDonald's restaurants in Netherlands or all pharmacies in a network or bank branches in Belgium and say "we move one tag to the upper relation to avoid its repetition". What is done by such relations can be done by a query in the database with one or two arguments (like the "operator" or "network" tag) and a bbox (see XAPI, overpass, etc for more info). Repeating the network or operator or brand name is not a problem for many features in OSM. I don't see why we should create an exception for footway routes. As it was writen by Frederik Ramm in 2008 ([1]): "Our database is a spatial database; this means that it has intrinsic knowledge about the location of objects. If you want to know about all footways in East Anglia, simply pass in a bounding box of East Anglia and request all footways, and the collection is made for you on-the-fly." Pieren [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories&oldid=179750 _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
