From a tool point of view (JOSM etc), multiple databases could be made
to be experienced exactly the same as different layers, so I guess it
doesn't matter that much.
With layers you are supposed to be able to turn them on and off at will
in your editor and choose which you see in an easy way, so such problems
could be easily spotted and fixed anyway. You could also have automatic
checkers for layer overlaps. Those issues could be managed, and I think
the advantages of a layered design clearly outweigh the disadvantages,
especially when we get more and more data density and more and more
different types of data.
I don't really care that much exactly how it's implemented, but a
potential risk I see with having separate databases, perhaps maintained
by some other entity, rather than readily integrated in the main
database is that it will get stuck as a niche feature not used by
OSM-Carto or any of the big providers.
On 2020-11-08 13:41, Tomas Straupis wrote:
2020-11-08, sk, 12:31 Anders Torger rašė:
To me it seems like an odd "political" design decision to have a
separate database though. Why just not arrange the database in layers,
and this could be a separate layer? From a technical perspective I
suppose it wouldn't have to be layers as such, one layer could in
actuality be a tag filter.
It must be separate enough to:
* not allow reusing objects from "main" database
* to have different description on what is allowed in it (for
example allowing objects borders of which cannot be precisely defined
etc.)
In general it is an advantage that the main database does not have
layers. In "standard GIS" layers separate data thus we can get bus
stops in the lake or on the building, road going into the lake etc. In
OSM it is much easier to spot such problems (and fix them) because it
is only one layer.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
