[OSM-dev] dropping segments

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

> Over in the current data model thread Frederik declared consensus in
> dropping segments. Is that really the case? I've thought it was
> before and been wrong.

I've been criticized before for declaring consensus where there were  
still little Gallic villages of resistance but I maintain that a  
large proportion of those who have thought about the matter agree  
that segments should go, and that it is possible.

> Frederik also noted that it's mostly the case that there is no top
> down design in OSM, just whoever does the work. I know some of you
> want that leadership, so I hereby order you all to drop segments.
> Please have this on my desk by Monday. :-P

Only if you let us polish your boots as well ;-)

> Dropping segments should be approximately trivial if we make a break
> with the past. Here's Steves n-point plan to success:

Good plan. Reducing triviality, here are some issues:

1. Branched and disconnected ways can be found and, mostly, remedied  
even today. Same with tagged segments and unwayed segments. So  
instead of breaking them up and then putting them on a Wiki page, we  
could do that today and at least reduce their number. (OTOH people  
might not be inclined do something about it until we thoroughly break  
it.)

2. Areas with holes. Don't have a good idea for them yet. Anyone else?

3. Dropping way and segment history is acceptable to me, but maye we  
should keep these things on file somewhere in case we need to do  
check something.

4. We would install all this on a testing platform first, to allow  
JOSM etc. to catch up... wouldn't we?

> I'd bet money that we could get all this done in a weekend with a few
> key people in a room, much like the dev day in Oxford.

I'm busy implementing relationships at the moment but after that, I'd  
even fly over to help.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00.09' E008°23.33'