----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Allan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "David Groom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Talk Openstreetmap" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 12:40 PM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed Relations
> > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 12:31 PM, David Groom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> The page >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations#Proposed_uses_of_Relations >> has a large number of proposed uses of relations, but there never seems >> to >> be any forward movement on these. >> >> However flawed the voting system for proposed tags is, at least there is >> a >> recognised procedure, and eventually proposed tags either make it into >> the >> mainstream of OSM or they don't. > > It's a matter of debate as to causation/correlation between the voting > procedures and mainstream OSM :-) > >> But this doesn't seem to be the case with >> proposed relations. >> >> I suspect the reason for this might be twofold. >> >> Firstly there is no recognised procedure for moving these forward. >> >> Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, many of the proposed uses of >> relations require some degree of knowledge of what the main renderers / >> other users of OSM data can actually cope with. So for instance there >> would >> be no point in me trying to move a particular proposal forward as I don't >> know if in practice the aim of the proposal can be achieved. >> >> I'm afraid I don't have a solution to the problem, but just wanted to >> flag >> it up as an issue. > > I would suggest concentrating on documenting the ones that are in use, > such as multipolygons, cycle route relations. Even better is to > concentrate on the ones that are in the db and widely consumed >by e.g. a renderer), Is there any easy way to find what relations fit into the above category? > e.g. a renderer), then on the ones in the db but not widely consumed > (e.g. turn restrictions) I there any easy way to find what relations fit into the above category? >and pretty much ignore the fanciful > I-think-it-would-be-great-if suggestions. > Well I'm never a fan of "fanciful I-think-it-would-be-great-if suggestions." :) But I do see, for instance, great advantages to the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Collected_Ways and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Dual_carriageways proposals. David > Cheers, > Andy > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
