2009/3/25 Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> > Hi, > > Igor Shubovych wrote: > >> This demands completely changing of the OSM API. >> I only think if it is good idea to change the whole protocol just to make >> history more clear. >> > > No, I wasn't suggesting any API change. I said: > > Ideally of course, the API would support such complex operations (so you >> could call an API function "split way" and it would be recorded in >> history as such). But this is not going to happen any time soon. >> > > and then suggested that we could make the client upload detailed > information about what it did. > > For example, if you have way "1" consisting of nodes "a,b,c" and way "2" > consisting of nodes "c,d,e". User now combines both in the editor. Editor > would normally delete way "2" and add nodes "d,e" to way "1". Someone who > later calls up the history of way "2" thinks: "What the hell, that was an > important road, why was it deleted?" > > If the editor would, before it deletes way 2, upload a new version of way 2 > with a tag "note=this way is now going to be deleted because it is merged > with way 1", and only delete way 2 after that, then someone who later looks > at the history of way 2 sees what happened. > > All without API changes. >
Aha, I see. May be great idea. But the problem will be when you try to store all history in the fields. It is ok when it is "history"="merged with N#12345" However this looks strange after some more time: "history"="added N#12345,split to W#123456 & W#1234567, merged with W#222222, added to R#100000" Regards, Igor > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail [email protected] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
