Has anyone, apart from the two in the dispute, actually complained about any of this?
Can't we just let one of them get bored? On 10 Feb 2008, at 17:13, Tom Hughes wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > "Ray Booysen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Feb 10, 2008 1:08 PM, bvh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 01:10:14PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout >>> wrote: >>>> This is beginning to get rather messy. TBH as a community not >>>> rendering the area in question is the only bargaining chip we >>>> have. Or >>>> slightly less extreme solution, drop the rendering of names. At the >>>> end of the day there's not much we can do against people who can't >>>> accept the fact that a place may have multiple names. >>> >>> I like the solution with the protected range >>> >>> - have the create node api check if the node is in a protected area, >>> if yes check the user and if allowed give the node an id in a >>> reserved >>> range >>> >>> - have the create way/relationship api check if any of the member >>> nodes/ways >>> are from the reserved range and if so check the user and if >>> allowed give >>> the way/relationship an id in a reserved range >>> >>> - have the edit/delete api check if the id in question is from the >>> reserved range and if so check the user >>> >>> Granted, I don't know ruby nor the api implementation but the >>> above seems doable to implement? >> >> Reserved Id ranges? Seems a little overkill. How about a >> protected bit on >> the node/way instead? > > It would have to be as (a) the IDs are allocated by MySQL as auto > increment values and (b) overloading meaning like that is horrible. > > Unfortunately adding columns to the node tables is a pain to do. > > I think there's a better way anyway - we do the check on all changes > but shortcut it by only doing checks if the user is marked as being > subject to checks. > > So new users and any users that had caused trouble would have that > flag set. Then if that flag was set their edits would be cross > checked against the restriction table(s) to see if they edit should > be allowed. > > Tom > > -- > Tom Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > http://www.compton.nu/ > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
