|
I have read this treatise Relations are not Categories and pretty much understand the principles being explained there. I am trying to edit and cleanup various ways near to me. Way 10936556 and way 85846201 are essentially the same street, but they do not appear to be in a relation with one another. The important difference here is that one is paved and one unpaved, but they are essentially the same street. I do not, as far as I can discern, see them currently in a relation (that defines the street). Would it be correct to create such a relation ? While examining those two ways, I noticed that they are part of relation # 1210739 (boundary "Alachua County"). This street (and these two ways) are not a boundary of Alachua County, nor do they exist within or cross into Alachua County. I am (wildly) guessing that these came to be from a TIGER import at some point. Am I safe in deleting this relation ? |
|
It would be unusual to create a relation just because the two ways model the same street. This is apparent from the fact that they have the same name and are connected to each other; no need for a relation here. You would start creating relations if you had routes "using" these ways, e.g. the street is called "A Street" but it is also part of the "National Trekking Route B" or so. Neither of the streets is part of relation 1210739 at this time, you must have misread something here. The relation 1210739 was my misunderstanding of the information being presented on the JOSM panels. As the two street/way segments, somewhere thought I read that connecting them was the preferred method, but perhaps not.
(12 Apr '19, 12:36)
NitaRae
They should definitely be connected (ie. the end node of one should be the same as the start node of the next), but there's no need to put them in a relation to specify that way1+way2+way3=Main Street.
(12 Apr '19, 17:39)
alester
|
