[Tagging] Catchment Areas
cbaines8 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 3 22:32:45 GMT 2012
On Mon, 2012-12-03 at 12:33 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> +1, they'll most likely make an exception also for small orders if it
> is for a place a few steps from the "border", while they will probably
> make exceptions for larger orders also if it is a little more distant.
> IMHO for pizza services a less intrusive way of storing catchment
> areas would be more suitable, like a radius in kilometres/miles, or a
> reference to existing more official areas like administrative
> boundaries or place polygons. It might also be a distance like 10 km
> where this is the real distance (routing) and not as the crow flies.
> These would be ways to store useful information without putting load
> on the db and with very little risk of breaking compared to explicit
I can see the food issue is becoming a recurring theme, and this is
detracting from the main reason I put forward this proposal. I have now
removed the food references from the proposal, such that now, the
subjects of the relation would be schools and medical facilities, whose
catchment areas are better defined, and of more use to more people.
> As others have pointed out: if you look how often the very important
> polygons like administrative areas or the coastline breaks, it is very
> likely that potential explicit and individual catchment areas for each
> and every pizza service will most of the time be broken.
Again, this proposal does not, and was not designed to address the
fragile nature of relations and I do not feel that this should be a
reason for avoiding adding this important information to the map (in
reference to medical facilities, pizza is slightly less important).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Tagging