2013/5/7 Peter Wendorff <wendo...@uni-paderborn.de>: > Look what happens in OSM all the time: POIs are moved slightly to match > aerial images - following your definition that should be another ID now
No, That's one of the nice properties of ids without coordinates! To me it would remain the same - except when a tool or the user is fooling the concept. At least the tools you can debug. Yours, Stefan 2013/5/7 Peter Wendorff <wendo...@uni-paderborn.de>: > Am 07.05.2013 09:58, schrieb Stefan Keller: >> Hi, >> >> You wrote: >>> - it's roughly in that bounding box (e.g. the city or a given part of >> >> A soon as you use the word "roughly" - the id approach is doomed to fail. >> According to OO and database technology an id is a well-defined >> surrogate with a well-defined data type. > > Then it's not the same "permanent" we talk about. > Look what happens in OSM all the time: POIs are moved slightly to match > aerial images - following your definition that should be another ID now > - but that's not what people usually want if they request for a > permanent ID, similar to changes from node to polygon to multipolyogn etc. > > "It's in that bounding box" nevertheless would have been the better > wording, (equalling "is roughly at that position, so if you want to use > roughly/estimation, it's possible even then). > > regards > Peter _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk