[OSM-talk] is_in

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On 5/26/07, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> Honestly I don't really see what is gained by having this data *in*
> OSM at all. In other situations I have said that I want data in OSM
> because it is then editable; but in this case, it is very difficult
> to extract the actual structure tree (you cannot click a town in your
> editor and see the suburb nodes highlighted... well... it *could* be
> done but would only ever work for smaller areas), and modifying the
> whole structure tree is even more complex. You can modify the "isin"
> of a suburb here and there, but to systematically find anything else
> in order to change it would be a challenge suitable only for planet
> file hackers.

Eventually the administrative boundaries will also be in OSM, at which
point you can simply pick a node and determine the administrative
regions it is in...

Fundamentally I'm against adding the data to the nodes and for using
boundaries instead, but I understand boundaries are harder to use...

Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog at gmail.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/