Hey,
Frederik Ramm wrote: > I don't think it should. The API makes no claim that a way is some > geometric object; a way is just a collection of nodes. Like discussed on IRC yesterday /my/ opinion is clear; if there is or will be an enforcement on length because of 'client/server' interaction, check for actual corruption must be trivial too add, an the only thing useful for our data collection. > If the API would start to do geometry inspection, then you'd have to add > loads of additional checks as well. For example for self-intersecting > areas or ways with length==0 even because first and last node, while > being different, have the same coordinates, and whatnot. Lets check for it :) (I'm serious) I was even surprised we seem to go on PostgreSQL but don't go PostGIS. >> As always OSM fixer is on rampage to filter about 6000 plus ways, >> leaving 4492 matches, of them 405 become one-way-ways. Relations >> haven't been found duplicate in this way. > > As long as you fix things that are obviously completely broken, like > ways referring to deleted nodes, that's fine. But if you venture into > the "this makes no sense to me so I'll fix it", it might be better to > discuss your ideas on this list *beforehand* rather than just tell us > afterwards what your bot is doing (or has done). I have discussed this the previous night on IRC. And 'this makes no sense', did not come from me, but a few days ago from someone else. But please speak up if you know anything useful with sequential duplication for members. I cannot :) Stefan _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
