[OSM-talk] Wanted feature for API 0.7 ??

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 2:08 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

>  I was actually trying to suggest that it might, in some cases, really
> make sense for things to be shared between the then and the now. If you
> take the Parthenon in Rome, then the geometry should be pretty much the
> same between now and ancient times, and as you say, refining the
> geometry of today's tourism=attraction should ideally also improve the
> ancient place_of_worship=church. This could not be done if you have
> Ancient Rome on a separate server.
>
> Much as we pride ourselves in topological correctness - for us, a
> junction is not where two linear shapes happen to intersect, but an
> explicitly placed node that, if moved, will modify both shapes -, I
> would also love to see continuity in the temporal dimension, i.e. I
> would prefer the Parthenon to use the same nodes, then and now, because
> it *is* the same building.
>

But what if there was a huge earthquake and the location of the Parthenon
(wait... isn't this in Greece, not Rome?) moved by 10 meters because the
underlying tectonic plate shifted? It's still the same building but the
nodes need to have different locations depending on the time (i.e., before
earthquake and after earthquake).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090609/ffbaa128/attachment.html>