[Talk-GB] road relations

[Gareth L]

I was about to say, relations of this manner seem duplicitous of simply having an address.

Street objects.. like bins and benches might make a bit of sense. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a street address on a bench node. But I’m fairly sure a query could be crafted to detect the nearest way to get that information, should it be required.

Gareth

________________________________
From: Dave F via Talk-GB <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2019 11:29:33 AM
To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] road relations

Hi

I've yet to hear a valid reasoning for this relation type. It's much more beneficial to add addresses instead.

There appears an increasing tendency to collect almost anything together into a relation. See public-transport's 'stop_area' as another example This is not why relations were conceived. It just adds duplication, confusion & errors.

Personally I would delete associatedStreet.

DaveF

On 01/06/2019 11:10, Jez Nicholson wrote:

Has anyone else come across relations grouping road assets? i.e. the road
itself plus shops, buildings, street objects? e.g.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1866997 Has this format become
accepted elsewhere in the world or is it experimental?

Regards,
              Jez





_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org<mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20190601/10ffc68d/attachment.html>