[OSM-dev] Datamodel relation/member constraints

[Stefan Keller]

> Correct. I would be happy though if writers of editors etc. could act as
> if the relation members were ordered, and thus upload them in the same
> sequence they were downloaded. This gives us the option of switching to

In APISs/interfaces there's often a dilemma to make 'life' easier for
writers or readers.
Imposing the "same order" is even more demanding for 'data producers' than
imposing an ordering.
I would not recommend both in order to make APIs simple.
-- S.

2008/6/1 Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:

> Hi,
>
> >> Next to this; can a user explicitly trust the sequence 1,2,1,3; or is
> >> this currently not guaranteed?
> >
> > This is not guaranteed. Relations are unordered. As far as I can tell
> > currently the API returns relations with the member nodes sorted by
> ascending
> > ID first and then the member ways sorted by ascending ID
>
> Correct. I would be happy though if writers of editors etc. could act as
> if the relation members were ordered, and thus upload them in the same
> sequence they were downloaded. This gives us the option of switching to
> an ordered mode later if we think it is necessary, without having to
> change editors.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20080601/0b290c98/attachment.html>