Tom Hughes wrote: >Sent: 23 April 2008 11:00 PM >To: Frederik Ramm >Cc: OSM-Dev Openstreetmap >Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] OSM Notes API, Issue Tracking (was: "See Data", a UI >for browsing OSM data in the main map) > >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.
I was thinking along the same lines. We already uses a notes= tag for general comments on feature in the db. This probably would be better under a different name. postit is probably trademarked so how about "flag". (With its condition is either raised or lowered ;-) ) Cheers Andy > >> 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 _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
