I was about to say, relations of this manner seem duplicitous of simply having an address.
Street objects.. like bins and benches might make a bit of sense. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a street address on a bench node. But I’m fairly sure a query could be crafted to detect the nearest way to get that information, should it be required. Gareth ________________________________ From: Dave F via Talk-GB <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2019 11:29:33 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] road relations Hi I've yet to hear a valid reasoning for this relation type. It's much more beneficial to add addresses instead. There appears an increasing tendency to collect almost anything together into a relation. See public-transport's 'stop_area' as another example This is not why relations were conceived. It just adds duplication, confusion & errors. Personally I would delete associatedStreet. DaveF On 01/06/2019 11:10, Jez Nicholson wrote: Has anyone else come across relations grouping road assets? i.e. the road itself plus shops, buildings, street objects? e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1866997 Has this format become accepted elsewhere in the world or is it experimental? Regards, Jez _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
