Deleting, deleting... First we should try to understand the meaning, the purpose of any data that has been contributed by someone else that we don't understand.
I understand the purpose and meaning of the first two relations. Each of them describe a route, so the type=route / route=road looks ok to me . The second one does not provide much more info than the members already provide, but let's consider it will improve in the future with for example an operator=* tag. For the third one, I don't understand it. It is a big list (collection if your prefer) of roads, and I don't understand the opening_hours tags. What is this supposed to describe ? Does this mean nobody can drive on these roads except during the opening_hours ? 2014-08-23 11:18 GMT+02:00 Werner Hoch <werner...@gmx.de>: > Hi, > > Am Donnerstag, den 21.08.2014, 19:20 +0100 schrieb Dave F.: > > http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=18159&_noCache=on > > > > This route relation appears to be just for the B3070. Isn't that a waste > > of time as it's covered by the ref tags on the ways? > > > > I thought route relations were a way to allow tagging of journeys taken > > over numerous types of ways. Any reason why I shouldn't delete it? > > They are used to describe infrastructure, too. Currently there are 85000 > relations of that kind in the database. (10000 in DE, only 100 in UK) > > Often the type=route route=road have extra tags like operator, full > name, wikipedia/data link, ... > > The relation builds a single object for a specific road > http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20884 > > Personally, for roads with lower importance, like the B3070 I wouldn't > create extra relations. > http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18159 > > > In other mails I've seen the ref discussion again. Should it be only on > the way or on the relation? > While it is redundant to place it on both, it helps to do QA tasks like > missing segments, wrong elements, wrong ref, ... > > "Relations are not Categories" discussion: > Whenever this page is cited I'm wondering how would you identify the > specific "category" with a database request? > > just my 2 cents. > > This one looks like a bad relation, anyone likes to delete it? > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2621325 > > Regards > Werner (werner2101) > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk