Le 4 novembre 2017 17:37:12 GMT+01:00, Thorsten Kurz <tkurz@gmx.net> a écrit :

+1 for Simon.

From what I observe, it's hard enough to keep the current data up to
date (and unbroken), so I'd rather avoid piling years of historical data
on top of it, especially if current boundaries get broken in the process.

Thorsten



On 04.11.2017 13:51, Simon Poole wrote:
 
 
 Am 04.11.2017 um 13:36 schrieb Andreas Bürki:


 Agree. I would never delete old boundaries, as they might server later
 on for historical purposes, e.g. If somebody wants to do a map showing
 the development of community mergers in Switzerland.



 As I've pointed out that has nothing to do with the changes at hand, but
 regardless of that: removing the old boundaries after mergers is simply
 a practical concern.
 
 - they don't actually exist
 - they make editing (a lot) more difficult
 - there are no QA tools for them, essentially guaranteeing that they
 will be broken and useless after a couple of years
 - in summary: an awlful lot of baggage to carry around for the
 theoretical use case of documenting ~6 years of changes in the
 boundaries (which you can get from the history dump without all of the
 above issues)
 
 But as said, that is not the issue at hand.
 
 Simon
 
 
 

 talk-ch mailing list
 talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch
 http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
 

talk-ch mailing list
talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch
http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch