[OSM-dev] API 0.7+: Split node concept?
frederik at remote.org
Tue Oct 12 21:19:15 BST 2010
Chris Browet wrote:
> I am wondering (I wonder a lot lately ;-)) if some have already given a
> thought to the fact that nodes actually represent 2 different concepts
Yes, this is something that has been discussed on and off for at least
two years. I know because we mentioned in the first edition of our OSM
Of course the "node" element would have to be kept not only for POI
nodes but also for topology nodes (where two ways meet).
Having geometries in ways would be much more traditional-GIS-like and
would simplify many things. However your suggestion mixes in-way
geometry with geometry by reference to nodes; and it has to because
otherwise you lose topology. But this means you don't get the full
advantages of either.
A big potential problem I see is promoting and demoting nodes - you
select and tag a "point" in a way, thereby creating a node; you later
remove the tag from the node, thereby deleting a node. You let a road
and a forest boundary share geometries, thereby creating proper nodes
for each shared coordinate; you split them apart, deleting the nodes and
creating two sets of points-in-ways.
I see the basic idea but it all seems a but uneven to me, even ugly to
Most of the positive aspects for the consumer could probably be achieved
by producing a kind of augmented planet file and diff, where internally
you still have nodes and ways as ever, but all <nd> objects are extended
with a lat and lon attribute. If the node is untagged it will not be
present in the nodes section of the file; if it is tagged it will be
This would be API version independent.
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
More information about the dev