[Tagging] [OSM-dev] Super-relations or not

Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net
Mon Nov 1 14:46:27 GMT 2010


Peter Budny wrote:
> If you want this to be the standard way of tagging things, then we 
> NEED to get the tools up to spec.  I also noticed that Potlatch 
> doesn't change the role from forward to backward when you 
> reverse a way.  (JOSM does the right thing, though.)

Patches welcome.

I'm not saying that as the standard snide answer to everything - I really
mean it. As people have been developing more and more intricate uses of
relations, the barrier to entry for new mappers gets higher, so yes, someone
needs to upgrade the tools to cope. And I'm not happy with being the sole
point of responsibility every time someone devises a new rule for use of
relations.

In particular P1's relations code needs:
- content-sensitive behaviour (like reversing forward/backward roles, and
only carrying through turn restrictions to the relevant ways in case of
split)
- relation ordering support
- super-relation support

Yell if you need any help getting to grips with the P1 source.

cheers
Richard


-- 
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Super-relations-or-not-was-Relation-member-roles-from-Osmosis-import-tp5682868p5693945.html
Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



More information about the Tagging mailing list