[OSM-talk] Advanced relationships

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

> Ian Sergeant <isergean at hih.com.au> writes:
>
>> Since all the current proposals being made both here and on the wiki
>> involve linking segments, if you think that is not a good idea to  
>> link
>> segments, then now is the time to explain why and possibly expand  
>> on a
>> better alternative.
>
> As I understand it advanced relationships are intended to be a generic
> way to link any types of object together.  They don't depend on the
> existence of segments.

I concur.

It is already a widely (not universally) accepted consensus that we  
don't need segments in their present form. Abolishing segments would  
make many things easier. It is just that nobody got round to  
implement it yet (and it has to be implemented in several places at  
the same time).

I would be prepared to use (or re-introduce) segments as part of a  
well-strucured data model like the GDF wher they form the base layer  
on which everything else is built. But currently segments are really  
just an extra layer of indirection, tempting people to do all sorts  
of things they really shouldn't.

The "advanced relationship" proposals do not require segments.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00.09' E008°23.33'