[OSM-dev] segment discussion - fork of mysql partitioning

[Richard Fairhurst]

Andy wrote:

> I'll reinforce my wish to be able to override a way's characteristics. No
> problem for nodes of course but if we loose segments then there is for
> instance no possibility for me to continue to tag a canal way segment as
> being a lock. At the moment I tag the nodes at each end as "lock_gate" and
> theoretically I could do the same with tunnels ("portal") or bridges
> ("abutment")
> [snip]
>
> However there are many instances when I
> don't really want to create the way at all, simply because the information I
> have about any eventual way along that pathway is negligible. Perhaps for
> instance I traversed along a 100m section of new highway while mapping one
> that crossed at a staggered junction. I don't really want to make that 100m
> into a way, I'd rather leave it as segments as its easier to see that its
> unfinished business.

Interesting points. Both of them, though, I think are really tagging  
questions rather than arguments in favour of segments per se.

For example, with a lock, you should really tag the nodes as "bottom  
gate" and "top gate", and agree to attach the lock's attributes to one  
or the other (width, fall, mitre|guillotine|single, opening times  
etc.). Similarly, with the unfinished segment question (and I do  
exactly the same as you here!), it could just as easily be created as  
a way with "status=unfinished", say, or "status=untagged".

Hm. Anyone seen the Map Features guy around here recently? ;)

cheers
Richard