[OSM-talk] implementation of relations in josm

[Jo]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>   
>> Also the other problem with 
>> splitting and merging of roads needs attention. Rather urgently I would 
>> say.
>>     
>
> I agree. It is however again one of the problems where different
> relations will need different actions - when a way in a route relation
> is split, both new ways need to be members, but when a way in a turn
> restriction relation is split, only the one at the junction should be
> a member.
>
> Somehow I always thought that we should have a rather complex
> "presets" style configuration file for JOSM that tells it what to do
> with various kinds of relations but maybe a simple hack would be
> better than nothing for now; in the case of splitting ways perhaps
> just always ask the user what he wants.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>   
That sounds wonderful to me. Maybe a bit harder for people who are just 
starting, but they'll overcome it quickly enough. It's certainly better 
than breaking route relations. What if somebody tries to do the opposite 
(re)combine a road, where part of it is part of a route relation? This 
should simply be impossible. In fact I'm a bit disappointed the API 
doesn't simply forbid this, but that probably also has to do with the 
different kind of possible relations. I must admit that I didn't look 
into turn restriction and house numbering relations and what would be 
the requirements to implement those yet.

Polyglot