[Talk-us] Per-State relations for the Appalachian Trail

[Martijn van Exel]

> On May 2, 2016, at 9:49 AM, Mike N <niceman at att.net> wrote:
> 
> On 5/2/2016 11:41 AM, Elliott Plack wrote:
>> This got me thinking, is there any specific need to have the route
>> broken up by state? Unlike interstate highways, where maintenance
>> changes across state lines, at the border, the AT maintenance is handled
>> by a trifecta of federal agencies and a non-profit. There are also 31
>> clubs that share some of the maintenance on some sections.
> 
>  The advantage of breaking up a relation into smaller relations is to minimize the probability of edit conflicts.  I don't know how often things change, or more detail is added on the Appalachian Trail.   My tendency would be to leave it separated, but I have no strong opinion either way.

I am with Mike here. The state boundary offers an obvious and visible opportunity to slice up potentially unwieldy relations into smaller chunks. Huge relations make editing trickier (conflicts, relation member management, loading times) and data processing potentially more time and memory consuming.