Karl Guggisberg <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Matthias > >> I guess this happens when trying to delete a deleted object. But why does >> JOSM make a distinction between deleted >> and visible when the API doesn't? > Because an object could be deleted in one layer but not in the other. When > you merge the first layer to the second you should end up with a conflict. > > "deleted==true" means: "marked to be deleted on the server" > "visible==false" means: "successfully deleted on the server"
So I guess JOSM is downloading new data into a new layer (that it doesn't show to the user) and then trying to merge it into the existing layer? Still, I can see that JOSM needs to make that distinction internally. But I don't think it needs to confuse the user with that. For the user deleted and unvisible are the same things. > >> What this comes down to is the question what JOSM should do when during >> data update it finds that an object it has >> marked for deletion is already deleted on the server. I think it should >> be safe to just remove those objects from the >> dataset. After all it is not really a conflict when the JOSM user and the >> API both think that something should go away. > Agree. Currently, this case triggers a conflict in JOSM. We could change the > upload process to avoid that. No, not the upload process, but the download/update process. At the end of the download it could display a message like "xxx nodes marked for deletion have already been deleted on the server. Should they be purged from the data?" Matthias _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
