[OSM-talk] superways as relations ?

[Stefan Neufeind]

Matthias Julius wrote:
> vegard at engen.priv.no (vegard) writes:
> 
>> On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 11:07:24AM -0000, m*sh wrote:
>>> On Mon, August 4, 2008 10:14, vegard wrote:
>>>> For naming of streets in cities, where properties change very often and
>>>> you have to make many small ways, it sometimes gets annoying that the
>>>> name is duplicated.
>>>>
>>>> I was wondering: How good/easy would it be to make a superway-relation
>>>> to fix that? I.e. group several ways for labeling-intentions?
>>>>
>>>> I'm no expert on the inner workings in either of the renderers, but to
>>>> me it sounds like a quick fix to a small annoyance. If someone that
>>>> knows the renderers could either agree or disagree, I'd be happy anyways
>>>> (well, obviously happier if they agree :)
>>> Actually there is a 'mantra' on a german mailing list stating that,
>>> "we are not tagging for the renderer"
>> I agree. We're not tagging for the renderer. At least, we're not tagging
>> it *wrongly* for the renderer.
>>
>> But in practise, we might need to give the renderer some hints with
>> some extra tagging. Of that, I personally am a little more inclined to
>> accept that. But others might agree/disagree with me. I think adding a
>> relation like that to help the renderer does in no way destroy the data
>> model.
> 
> Regardless of the renderers, duplication of data is evil, IMHO.  Every
> time a way is split to allow one of its properties to change all other
> properties are duplicated.

[...]

This leads me to another thought: How do editors handle cases where a 
way is member of a relation and you split it? Would make sense to add 
both parts to the relation imho. Does somebody know how editors handle 
that currently?


Kind regards,