[OSM-talk] Topology (was: OSM the mediocre alternative)

[SteveC]

On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 00:01 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Johnny Doe <uucp1 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > please read about the GRASS vector data model before
> > claiming a fundamental incompatibility between Simple
> > Features and a topological network:
> > http://grass.itc.it/grass62/manuals/html62_user/vectorintro.html
> 
> I never claimed a fundamental incompatibility! I just thought 
> Christopher wanted to say we don't need topology except for routing, and 
> answered I believe we also need topology for editing.

No, chris is most interested in spreading FUD, see his latest blog post
despite the things he raises being answered. Remember, where 2.0
approaches.

And yes you're right, topological is really useful since OSM is a wiki
and we track changes in nodes. Otherwise moving an intersection of many
roads would mean updating many linestrings not one node.

have fun,

SteveC | steve at asklater.com | http://www.asklater.com/steve/