Frederik Ramm schrieb: > I don't think Dave was thinking of anything more than two different > relations (partly) using the same ways. That would not warrant any > special kind of relation. > > For situations in which you want relations contained in relations - e.g. > in a situation where a nationwide cycle route comprises 5.000 ways and > thus cannot be expressed in one single relation -, what I suggest is > creating a number of "sub relations" that are members of a "super > relation" with the same tags as the "sub relation". (The super relation > might have a different "name" tag from the sub relations, in case you > want to name your sub-relations "blah cycleway, southern section" or so).
I would solve this in a sort-of linked-list relation group. i.e. every section gets it's own relation, with the ways as members, plus the relations of the adjacent bits as additional members. (role=adjacent, perhaps) -- Dirk-Lüder "Deelkar" Kreie Bremen - 53.0952°N 8.8652°E
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
