On Fri, 2023-01-06 at 11:50 +0100, Sören Reinecke wrote:
> To sum up: Coordinates can be used in the same wrong way as OSM id as
> they're both not sufficient enough for the use case most people are
> using it (indirectly). Coordinates are already part of the 'geo' URI
> scheme. There is no visible reason to me why adding another unstable
> identifier like the osm id is a bad idea. As long as OSM ids are used
> in
> a dynamic and not in a hardcoded way and proberly updated by the
> tools
> people are using to retrieve these data (e.g. Overpass, Sophox or
> end-user apps like OrganicMaps) 'geo' uris are always generated by
> tools. If some does that manually then this person is in charge to
> change that when the physical position of the POI changes too. People
> tend to forget about these little urls as long as they don't see a
> GUI
> (graphical user interface) connected to it like a map on their
> website.

Good point. Also consider that OSM ids have an advantage over
coordinates, because if an OSM object gets deleted then a query for
that id will return "Not found". That in itself is valuable information
to a data consumer. 

I really don't understand why anybody would make that into some kind of
Pandora's box that must not be opened. 

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Reply via email to