[OSM-talk-be] amenity on relation of widespread nodes

[Jo]

I looked at his other edits and I get the impression he's from Switzerland.
Maybe things are done differently there.

Jo

2013/6/24 Marc Gemis <marc.gemis at gmail.com>

> The wiki clearly describes that the relation=network should be used to
> combine routes (walking, bus, ...) together. see
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Network
> This "network" groups together single nodes. That's outside the scope.
>
> From a database design viewpoint, I understand that one wants to
> "normalize" common attributes in a separate table. However, this is not the
> way most things are done in OSM. We do not create a network of
> Shell-tankstations, McDonalds restaurants or BMW-dealers.
>
> I would contact the mapper and ask him on which basis he thinks that we
> should create relations like this.
>
> regards
>
> m
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Glenn Plas <glenn at byte-consult.be> wrote:
>
>>  Hi everyone,
>>
>> Been looking at this relation today :  271476  ( see
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/271476 )
>>
>> It has an amenity set, but these points are widely spread out,  I think
>> this goes against the intended idea behind amenity's.
>>
>> Any comments ?
>>
>> Glenn
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20130624/5b000e11/attachment.htm>