Jochen Topf briefly mentions some problems with relations in his latest SOTM 2018 talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbxabz22ni4
According to him, it's the diversity of the relations without decent support from the OSM-model makes it hard for data-consumers to process them. The rest of the talk is mainly about changing the nodes in ways model, though. As for site relations, besides Yves, there is also the historic.place map that does something with the site-relation. regards m On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 5:16 AM Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 12:13 PM Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@tutanota.com> > wrote: >> >> 1. Oct 2018 10:18 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: >> >> site >> >> >> This relation type is a horrible mistake and should not be encouraged by >> editors > > Care to expand? >> >> - this data is basically not usable. > > Sure it is. Say I want to know what amenities an RV park has in another > city...you could go "hey, what does Somewhereville RV Park have?" or just > throw Somewhereville RV Park and get a list of everything that belongs to the > same site. Dump station, fuel pump, convenience store, information stand, > mailboxes, laundry, showers, toilets...regardless of whether or not these > things are named or not, or even share the same name as the RV park itself. > Like, say, "Old Faceful Geyser" (actually a splashpad) in the "Jellystone > Park" RV park at Lake Eufaula (to use something I might try if I was taking > my boyfriend and niece truck camping and wasn't actually familiar with this > being a delightfully furry, yet corny, and relatively comfortable for cheap > truck-tent camping). > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
