On Mon, 2015-12-07 at 19:20 +0000, Andrew Hain wrote: > But surely I can see no obvious harm in the presence of the relations. Also > searching the database by reference doesn’t always work, for instance not all > road segments tagged A1 in the UK are part of the road from London to > Edinburgh. > In the UK, there are obviously 2 roads with the ref=A1, although there should only be one in GB.
As Richard pointed out, relations do raise the bar for new mappers and add zero value to the map. Phil (trigpoint) >________________________________________ > From: Chris Hill <[email protected]> > Sent: 07 December 2015 10:27 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] route relations type=road > > On 07/12/15 18:11, Philip Barnes wrote: > > On Sat, 2015-12-05 at 00:54 +0000, Dave F. wrote: > >> Hi > >> > >> I know this has been discussed before , but recent edits by user: > >> abc26324 prompts me to ask/verify again the point of road relations > >> in the UK. Example: > >> > >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/103301#map=10/51.2112/-2.5578 > >> > >> Route relations are meant to represent, err... routes taken by people > >> that transverse multiple different ways; such as bus cycle etc & not > >> just a 'collection' of things, especially when they can easily be > >> collated/extracted from the ref on the actual way. > >> > >> I notice even the M4/M5 have one apiece. This has lead to tag > >> duplication which can never be a good thing. > >> > >> Are there any roads in GB where references are shared? If not, I see > >> no reason for their existence. > >> > > I have noticed that he is at it again and has not responded to either > > my comment with regards to the A50, or chillly's comments with regard > > to the A161. > > > > This time he has added a relation for the bits of the A1 that are not > > A1(M), there is already an A1 relation. I again am not sure why we need > > such relations, and the history is too big to view.delete > > > The author has not responded, so I have deleted the route relation for > A161. I will use changeset comments on any more that I find in the UK to > discuss why they are there - my expectation would be to delete any > others but only after attempting to engage the author. > > -- > Cheers, Chris (chillly) > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
