2008/4/23 Frederik Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > You do realise that there are people already working on adding this > > to the main site? There is a code branch in the repository with some > > preliminary work already. > > I think that Martijn van O had a prototype of an OL based issue > tracker as well - is the one in SVN based on that, or an entirely > different thing?
It's separate as far as I know. > What I like about Richard D's variant is that you can apply a note to > an *area*, while the code in our SVN seems to assume that notes always > relate to a *point*. I think that is to some extent an open question, although I personally have tended to reach the conclusion that sticking to a point is probably sufficient and that the additional complication of allowing areas is probably not necessary. > Personally I always thought that notes could be usable not only for > people pointing out errors, but also for meta-info like: "drove around > this quarter for two hours. think I got all the roads but some > cycleways t.b.d.". I definitely disagree there - in fact one of the points I made to the author of the notesapi branch earlier on was that I was concerned that it was leaning to much in that direction. If we're going to do that then I would definitely want to have different classes of note (to be honest I'm not sure I like note as a name but I'm not that bothered) as I want to be able to subscribe to problem reports but I won't be interested in people's random wibblings in the same way. In particular I see these as things which can be marked as done, so that they have a limited lifetime and don't just build up forever more, cluttering things up. > IMHO notes are very well suited for placing them *outside* of the > central OSM data base because they do not have to integrate tightly > with the rest; there's no reason I can see why notes should not reside > on an external service, with editors connecting that service through > appropriate plugins. I think they do need to integrate tightly - sure JOSM can get them from somewhere else via a plugin, but the whole point here is to lower the barrier to reporting issues. So we want people that see a problem on the map to be able to click and report it, not to have to go wandering off finding some external issue tracker. > I haven't studied the notes branch in SVN closely, and have probably > missed the discussion about it on the lists (pointers anyone?), but if > the plan is to add some kind of <note> objects to OSM data then I > would like to register mild opposition. Let the core do the core > tasks, and do everything else elsewhere. Otherwise you'll end up with > geotagged images in the central database sooner or later ;-) Well currently the branch has a separate API call to get notes for an area, but I had always thought of it as something the main API should return (live, active notes anyway) and that was something I questioned. Sure there's a fine line about what should and shouldn't be in the main database, but in this case I think this is on the right side of that line. Tom -- Tom Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.compton.nu/ _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
