<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
10. Oct 2018 12:33 by <a href="mailto:andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 04:44, Andrew Harvey <<a href="mailto:andrew.harvey4@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">andrew.harvey4@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br /><blockquote>I think the import should:</blockquote><blockquote>2. Leave out the refs/ids unless these are surveyable.</blockquote><br />I beg to differ; this is both valuable data and ties each individual<br />item to the record in the dataset from which it is imported. It should<br />not be discarded.</blockquote><p><br /></p>I am not convinced that keeping them is a good idea.<p><br /></p><p>1) it is data unverifiable for normal user</p><p>2) there is no guarantee that id will not be modified and object will not be moved</p><p><br /></p><p>In case of verifiable identifiers (wikipedia tag) one may kept link from getting invalid.</p><p><br /></p><p>In this case there is no way to do that, so nobody should expect the ids to stay correct.</p><p><br /></p><p>-----</p><p><br /></p><p>So far I never did it, but whever I see __SITE_CODE__, BytomGIS:id, jastrzebiegis:idI am temted to remove such tags as useless.<br /></p><p><br /></p> </body>
</html>