[OSM-talk] Inheritance of roles in nested relations
list.osm at hughbris.com
Sat Dec 20 22:14:33 GMT 2008
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 22:53:54 +0100
Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> Hugh Barnes wrote:
> > It's a shame. You have to admit it's a useful device and would
> > reduce duplication of work (creation and maintenance) and storage
> > significantly.
> Sure but it's not something that should be done on the API level. The
> API is intended as an as-simple-as-possible storage engine. How you
> interpret data coming out of the API is your (the client's) choice.
Right. I don't think I suggested the API, just client apps (and
community expectation, I guess).
> I think that in the long run, all tools should be able to, on a
> fundamental level, accept a relation everywhere they would expect a
> way, and then substitute the relation's members.
> Which would apply
> recursively and thus neatly solve your problem.
Why would it necessarily apply recursively?
> I'm not sure there is a need to explicitly tag the fact that
> something is a "parent" or "child" relation in your case.
To provide clear guidance for clients, because as you said — and I think
is right, though I can't currently think of examples — this inheritance
is not always desirable. Also, component=yes prevents someone
deleting something that looks useless on its own.
More information about the talk