On 19/10/17 14:31, Dave F wrote: > On 19/10/2017 12:04, Lester Caine wrote: >> On 19/10/17 11:35, Adam Snape wrote: >>> Doesn't its location within the UK make an explicit UK tag unnecessary? >> But when reading a single object tags do you know just where it is? Some >> other mechanism has to return the 'inside boundary' data which takes >> processing power. > > OSM is geospatially aware. Nominatim have stated that it's not intensive > processing & prefer it over is_in*. If unwilling to use 'inside > boundary' coding it requires *every* object to have multiple location > tags for *every* search boundary. Expecting mappers to add this enormous > amount of data is selfish.
The reverse of that is that there are a large number of boundaries that have yet to be mapped and in some instances may be difficult to map at all. I'm not suggesting that mappers add any more tags than useful and easy to add. What I AM suggesting is that 'Expecting mappers to add this enormous amount of data is ...' unnecessary when some key tags will cross reference the rest of the data! And where linked data changes then one does not have to address every object, just the top record. Yes automation can manage and change multiple records in parallel and fill multiple tags from the one entry, but does all that information have to be stored raw in OSM WHEN the processing can just as easily provide it? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
