On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 5:47 AM, SomeoneElse <li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> wrote: > dies38...@mypacks.net wrote: >> >> The waterway segments I collected into the relation are exactly analogous >> to roadway segments collected into a route relation. I do not think that >> the relation I created constitutes a category, really. --ceyockey >> >> > > The main reason why route relations are needed in the US is because a > particular piece of road can belong to more than one toute. This isn't true > everywhere (for example in the UK - routes can disappear and then pop up > again elsewhere). > > Does your waterway "route" consist of any ways that belong to more than one > waterway "route"?
Large river tagging is kind of a mess so I'm not quite sure where I stand on this. But we also use relations to map lakes that are too big to be mapped with a single way because of the 2,000 node limit. It seems like rivers are in a similar situation and the use of a relation does not seem completely out of place. It allows one real world object to be represented by one object in OSM and reduces duplication of tags on component ways. Toby Toby _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
