Hi Frederik,
On 02.07.2011 16:12, Frederik Ramm wrote:
The tool is doing background data requests. It should provide some
feedback to the user regarding this.
It shouldn't be doing background data requests, only send a request when
you explicitly ask for it.
Yes, but then the request is running asynchronous in the background.
There is no visible user feedback the request is still running. If your
server has problems and is not responding for five minutes the thread
will still be stuck. You could change the "license check" button to
indicate a running request.
The doCheck() in BasicLicenseCheck is in my opinion not right
regarding nodes that have no tags. As all information these nodes
carry is their existence and coordinates I see no reason why any other
status than the one of the last editor of that node could be relevant.
I don't think this is something for the plugin to decide.
A change in the coordinate could be expressed as a deletion and
recreation at a new position. The copyright (in case there exists one
on node level) would be solely on the last editor.
Any change of an object could be expressed as a deletion and recreation
but that doesn't mean that the recreation has happened without looking
at the old object. (For example, I could make a roundabout "rounder"
without actually adding any data of my own.)
I have changed the check to do this. I would like to discuss it before
submitting my changes. Actually the doCheck() might need some more
improvements.
I'm happy for anyone to make improvements, but please don't add your
personal interpretation of the licensing situation. If you can get
OSMF/LWG to say clearly that they will not remove a node that has been
created by someone who says no to ODbL and moved by someone else later,
then ok; but as long as such a statement does not exists, we must assume
that the node is going to be deleted.
I quote the full paragraph so we have the context.
Currently your plugin is doing license interpretation as well. Your
personal interpretation seams to be that if a node was created by a user
declining the CT it must be deleted. Even if it does not contain any
tags and is later moved. You rate it as Severity.DATA_LOSS.
So in case the plugin wants to display a neutral view without
interpretation it must tag these nodes as Severity.POSSIBLE_DATA_LOSS.
The only valid reason for DATA_LOSS would be if all involved users had
declined. The remaining mixed cases depend on the interpretation what
data needs to be removed.
Stephan
_______________________________________________
josm-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
