<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hi.<br>
I think, the name of the relation is far from optimal, but the basic
idea is not the worst, and we already use a similar approach in
nested Multipolygon-relations.<br>
<br>
But:<br>
1) "type=group" is far too unspecific and misleading, as it's NOT
intended to group similar items together (like a category), but to
form abstract, unnamed, but common objects to be reused. This is in
general the same as forming one outer-area in a multipolygon
relation out of several non-closed ways.<br>
<br>
2) For the Public transport example I see a major drawback for
stops. A common road with several (bus) stops may be shared by
different busses, but some the busses may omit different stops where
they don't stop. This would require again either to split the common
part to several ones (not much better than using the ways directly
now), or to use different relations/to use the relation only for
some of the routes sharing the same way. But then it does not get
that much easier than it is now.<br>
<br>
3) Lacking tool support (that's not a good argument, but
nevertheless I fear, these relations will for quite a while break
most tools and maps using Public transport information, one of the
IMHO best showcases of OSM.<br>
<br>
regards<br>
Peter<br>
<br>
Am 22.03.2012 13:13, schrieb Richard Mann:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMLmWVuK=bf9xFLwQQg0yUDki2xxs-n84XiOSoH=U1fg3hV9+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div>Relations are not categories. They are for recording
geospatial relationships between elements, not for putting
things in groups. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Put a tag on the elements saying this is part of Group X.
Wait for data users to work out a way to grab groups of elements
based on that tag (& maybe help code that sort of
functionality yourself).</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Richard</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:53 AM, LM_1 <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:flukas.robot%2Bosm@gmail.com">flukas.robot+osm@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"
class="gmail_quote">I have created a new proposal for group
relation (type). It is<br>
intended to reduce tagging duplication and make it easier to
map dense<br>
public transport areas by grouping ways that are used by
multiple<br>
transport lines (not having to add the same group to multiple
route<br>
relations).<br>
The proposal is here:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Group_Relation"
target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Group_Relation</a><br>
<br>
Please discuss or comment, preferably on the wiki discussion
page.<br>
<br>
<br>
Lukáš Matějka (LM_1)<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
talk mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org">talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk"
target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org">talk@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>