Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Lester Caine wrote: > | Mark Williams wrote: > |> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > |> Hash: SHA1 > |> > |> Lester Caine wrote: > |>> J.D. Schmidt wrote: > |>>> Lester Caine skrev: > |> [big snip] > |> > |>> LOGICALLY - there should never have been a problem created. A POI > element > |>> should consist of a single entity which may have additional area > information. > |>> Even those tags that are currently only defined as 'node' in many > cases WILL > |>> be expanded to include area information at some point. So PLEASE can > we have > |>> some sensible method of identifying PAIRS of tags so we can THEN > decide what > |>> to do with them !!! > |>> > |> Is this not a job for relations? If the pair were related, then we have > |> no problem? > | > | Correct - but how do you identify elements uniquely so you can create the > | relation? > > I'm not quite sure what you mean, but to try to bring this back onto > topic, if you mean "How do we find amenity=parking nodes that are > duplicates of areas?" the answer is that we find all the nodes inside > areas. If there are any that are just outside, we will miss them, whici > is annoying, but not the end of the world. In order to find them, we can > use a Simple postGIS query as suggested by Dave Stubbs (which I have > attempted to reformat a bit): > > select p.osm_id > ~ from planet_osm_point as p, > ~ planet_osm_polygon as a > where a.osm_id!=p.osm_id > ~ and a.osm_id in ( > ~ select a.osm_id from planet_osm_point as p, planet_osm_polygon as a > ~ where a.amenity='parking' > ~ and p.amenity='parking' > ~ and a.way && p.way > ~ and intersects(a.way, p.way) > ~ group by a.osm_id > ~ having count(p.osm_id) > 1 > ~ ) > ~ and p.amenity='parking' > ~ and a.way && p.way > ~ and intersects(a.way,p.way);
This will only work for the specific case where there is a single matching node that goes with the area, and I believe it will be time intensive when processing a large area. I don't believe there is any mechanism to create a.osm_id = p.osm_id - these will always have different id's? If they HAD matching id's them there would not be a problem. See proposed good practice ideas for fast consistent solution. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/ Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
