[Openstreetmap-dev] OSM - Schema - Phase 1 - Request for Comment

[Andy Robinson]

Tom Carden wrote:

>Please post the lists as a starting point, not a loose abstraction that is
>so similar to things we already use that I can't see the point of it.

If I start with the lists I would not know where I was coming from and, I
suspect, would also confuse others who have not been involved for as long as
your good self. I posted the original to the main list as well as dev for
that very reason.

>Is the task at hand here to expand the current format to hold polygons and
>points of interest?  Why not start there instead of backtracking over yet
>another way to represent things we already have?

I consider that the task is not to expand the format but to help clarify
what might constitute the content.

>Is there such a thing as a "way" currently used in OSM?  Sounds like new
>terminology for "segment" or "street" to me, and totally redundant.

Yes, the <way> is my suggested replacement for <street>. It simply means we
might use the same linear designator whether it's, for example, a street or
a railway or an overhead power line. The term "way" just happens to fit more
of the liner types than any other word... but its only semantics anyway.

>Unless you're going to write the code that produces it or consumes it, why
>should you care?  

I care very much because right now, as a user, I have no way of adding any
real map features other than nodes, line segments and a generic "name". If I
keep naming segments "path" so that I can remember its not a road I'm soon
going to have a hell of a task reediting all those line segments which are
currently all the same.

>And if you are going to write that code, I can't state
>emphatically enough that those who can code should be concentrating on
>other issues.

I don't doubt that but that's not what the purpose of the original post was.

>What's wrong with the wiki for format discussions if you must have them
>anyway?  It's a collaboratively edited document you want, not a
>conversation.

Nothing wrong with the wiki at all. I've contributed plenty to it recently.
However in this area of schema, keys and values it clearly needed some
co-ordination. The wiki already has some useful but un-coordinated listings
of features and some good points raised by imi on Schema. It was these that
prompted me to look at the issue in more detail. I offered to Steve that I
promote it based upon some street gazetteer stuff I had generated some time
back, and he encouraged me to do so. I'm not prepared to place items on the
wiki simply for it to be pulled apart and we end up back where we started. I
would rather get some views first then clean up and consolidate a wiki page.

Cheers,

Andy