2009/3/25 Stefan de Konink <[email protected]>: > Dave Stubbs wrote: >> >> Who needs SQL? >> http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/node/292984561/ways >> >> So yes. It is. > > Thanks very interesting; I didn't realise this could do the trick. > >> The API's Way.to_xml_node method strips out invisible nodes that it reads. >> http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/way/4043588 <-- no node >> The OldWay.to_xml_node history calls do not. >> http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/way/4043588/history <-- node >> (despite way timestamp saved after node was deleted) > > So I collected all the 'problematic' things. I think by what you mention, it > can be trivially fixed just by fetching all nodes and reinserting them > again?
Some of them are due to different bugs, but in general yes. The relations that reference node 0, 1 and other numbers below about 20 are a complete mistake (bug fixed ages and ages ago now) -- those nodes should be removed from the relations. > >> Potlatch also doesn't try to filter >> deleted nodes, so it'll appear in Potlatch too (and be successfully >> resurected if you save the way). > > This could be an award winning observation :) Can we test this is in a way? > > a) read the code. The getway and putway bits of amf_controller are fairly understandable. b) give it a go: http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=45.0965&lon=-64.3565&zoom=13&way=4043588 Make a minor change then deselect the way to save. Checkout the node history. Dave _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
