[Tagging] Data redundancy with "ref" tag on ways vs relations

"Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" xificurk at gmail.com
Tue Jul 31 09:33:14 BST 2012


Kytömaa Lauri wrote:
>  Petr Morávek [Xificurk] wrote:
>> 2) A relation exists with member ways without ref tag. This means that
>> the route is essentially mapped and any further editor is correcting
>> errors, that he found. Then someone comes and adds a ref tag to one of
>> the ways - why?
> 
> He drove by, and saw a different ref sign next 
> to that road from one intersection and the next
> one. He has no knowledge of where the ref on
> the relation comes from, and if it is still valid on
> all the ways currently part of the relation. He
> only knows that this way has a ref=new value,
> and it's all he can enter. Locals will eventually
> notice, and resurvey the whole area - they'd
> have to resurvey anyway.

If he knows for sure, that on that road from point A to point B is
ref=42 and not ref=56 as the OSM data says, then the user should fix it
as I wrote in previous email. Remove the ways from the current relation
and add the correct ref tag to the ways themselves, or create a new
relation for them. Problem fixed! Note, that if the edit was mistake
after all, then QA tool analyzing road network should catch that.

If he's not really sure about his data, but wants to alert locals "hey,
here may be something wrong", then he should use FIXME tag as for any
other dispute.

--
If I understood your scenario correctly, it can be summarized as: "Let's
use conflicting ref tags for road disputes instead of fixme tag."
Personally, I don't support this view.


Best regards,
Petr Morávek aka Xificurk

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20120731/7a3a47d8/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Tagging mailing list