[Talk-GB] road relations

[Colin Smale]

On 2019-06-01 12:29, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:

> 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.

Relations are great to represent real-world relations that cannot be
inferred (reliably) from the other data in OSM. Often a geometrical
relation exists, such as a node inside a polygon, but not always. 

OSM loves to allow things to be inferred from the data, but there is
usually a way of entering the attributes/relationships explicitly as
well, for the cases where the heuristics fall down. 

The wiki says about relations: "Relations are used to model logical (and
usually local) or geographic relationships between objects. They are not
designed to hold loosely associated but widely spread items. It would be
inappropriate, for instance, to use a relation to group 'All footpaths
in East Anglia'.Why don't PT stop_areas fit with this? 

C.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20190601/eac18e18/attachment.html>