frederik at remote.org
Tue Dec 9 11:48:47 GMT 2008
> that sounds elegant and solves the problem I had yesterday when trying
> to add some street numbers to a street made of many small ways that
> branch from the main one, i.e. something like this:
> | |
> | | |
> there is now at least one such relation on the map :)
Congratulations on constructing something that is likely to break as
soon as the first inexperienced mapper touches it ;-) it would have been
perfectly ok to just add nodes for the individual houses and tag them
with the full address data - no relations, no headache, and easy to
understand for everyone.
> An even better alternative would probably be to add the collected
> street relation to the associatedStreet one, but I'm not sure there is
> support for relations in relations in the api / editors
JOSM does support relations within relations but there is still a bug
that causes problems if both the containing and the contained relation
are created in the same session.
Still my advice is not to use relations wherever there is an easier way.
One set of address tags per address, nothing could be easier, no
More information about the talk