Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
On 6 Jan 2009, at 06:45, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Roman Neumüller wrote: I occasioanlly open hires areas in JOSM when stumbling over them. Boy: what a whole bunch of errors one then starts to fix...! All potlatch-related I suppose (sorry Rich ;-) I'd prefer (mandy rice-davieswell, I would, wouldn't I/mandy rice-davies) all n00b-related. Blaming the editor is just neglecting our social requirement to help the new guys: plenty of people perform excellent edits in Potlatch and plenty perform lousy ones in JOSM. Potlatch does sometime create duplicate ways for me when I splits features. These duplicates are invisible using Potlatch and the quantity of them varies from occasion to occasion. Sometimes one ends up with the new ones and the old one, or the old (long) way and one new one on top - something like that but sometimes everything is ok. I have come to the conclusion that the updates are not monotonic resulting in these effects sometimes when servers are busy. Is this a real effect? If one does have two ways on top of each other with identical tagging then one can't see them which is a shame and makes it much harder to sort out. The problem is made worse because it is not always possible to find out how many ways there are using the '/' t feature which only seems to work sometimes, and only works on the end node of an underlying way (I think). The fact that errors are invisible in Potlatch and that the editor creates them itself in the server communication (I think) is something we should address technically - it is not a training issue for newbies. Will API0.6 help? Oh, and was API0.6 actually been deployed on New Years day or whenever? Generally speaking, there are annoyances and small issues all over the tool base (not just Potlatch) and getting the tools working as advertised and easily for newbies would be very helpful to them. I don't use JOSM so I can't comment on that editor. Regards, Peter cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Invisible-coastline-errors-in-Potlatch-tp21234805p21305508.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
Peter Miller wrote: Potlatch does sometime create duplicate ways for me when I splits features. These duplicates are invisible using Potlatch and the quantity of them varies from occasion to occasion. This is a server issue more than anything else: it happens in times of server slowness. I got it a couple of times this Sunday afternoon. In short, splitting way B off from way A requires two writes: one of way B, then one of the new, shorter way A (http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/editors/potlatch/way.as#L576). If the second write fails, then the points in B will still be in A too. The solution is either to move splitting ways entirely to the server (so, although the user hits 'split', the way isn't actually split until the server returns a message), or to fix the server. I'd be interested to know _why_ the server runs so slowly at certain times. I'm not convinced API 0.6 will help: indeed, I suspect it may lead to increased server load. But others will know more than me. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Invisible-coastline-errors-in-Potlatch-tp21234805p21308233.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
The solution is either to move splitting ways entirely to the server (so, although the user hits 'split', the way isn't actually split until the server returns a message), or to fix the server. I'd be interested to know _why_ the server runs so slowly at certain times. ... or by fixing Potlatch to notify the user and suggest a retry? Regards, Marc -- Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
2009/1/6 Marc Schütz schue...@gmx.net: The solution is either to move splitting ways entirely to the server (so, although the user hits 'split', the way isn't actually split until the server returns a message), or to fix the server. I'd be interested to know _why_ the server runs so slowly at certain times. ... or by fixing Potlatch to notify the user and suggest a retry? It does that. I think this is probably a more complex fail. ie: Potlatch doesn't realise it's failed for some reason. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
Marc Schütz wrote: The solution is either to move splitting ways entirely to the server (so, although the user hits 'split', the way isn't actually split until the server returns a message), or to fix the server. I'd be interested to know _why_ the server runs so slowly at certain times. ... or by fixing Potlatch to notify the user and suggest a retry? Oh come on, if it was that simple I'd have done it already. :) In fact, I have done. On 8th June, 2007, according to the changelog on the wiki. Since then, whenever Flash Player lets Potlatch know of such a failure, Potlatch does indeed alert the user and offer the opportunity to retry. Have you ever actually used Potlatch? But if the ActionScript VM in Flash Player doesn't tell Potlatch that there's a problem with the connection, Potlatch can't know to tell the user anything. It could, of course, go out of its way to poll the server and ask if a particular operation has been completed. Believe me, I've spent long hours trying to work out whether that's possible. In API 0.5 it's not really practical, unless you have some serverside storage to maintain a list of what operations have been requested and/or completed: about the only place you could do this would be user preferences, which would be horrid. API 0.6 exposes version numbers, which makes it more feasible. But (a) polling the server isn't going to be that helpful anyway in times of high server load, (b) the previous query may just be running very, very slowly and will eventually execute anyway. IMX in a majority of cases, the second split write does execute, it's just that the server doesn't tell Potlatch about it. Of course, if you have a better idea, feel free to expand on it in more words than just fix it. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
The solution is either to move splitting ways entirely to the server (so, although the user hits 'split', the way isn't actually split until the server returns a message), or to fix the server. I'd be interested to know _why_ the server runs so slowly at certain times. ... or by fixing Potlatch to notify the user and suggest a retry? Oh come on, if it was that simple I'd have done it already. :) In fact, I have done. Well, I just wondered why you suggested two solutions, while leaving out the obvious one :-) It wasn't clear you had already implemented that... Regards, Marc -- Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Shaun McDonald wrote: http://openstreetmap.org/browse/way/22359503/history looks like it is a 2 node way. Seems that there is a bug in Potlatch, causing it to not show the coastline here. But the way contains the same node twice, thus is meaningless. That's not a bug in Potlatch, that's dodgy data. I liked the circular way originally going between two points (ABA). It got even better when B was removed. /me looks for the created_by tag and walks away whistling innocently Ban Everything!!1! Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
Shaun McDonald wrote: http://openstreetmap.org/browse/way/22359503/history looks like it is a 2 node way. Seems that there is a bug in Potlatch, causing it to not show the coastline here. But the way contains the same node twice, thus is meaningless. That's not a bug in Potlatch, that's dodgy data. I liked the circular way originally going between two points (ABA). It got even better when B was removed. That's simply a singularity! /me looks for the created_by tag and walks away whistling innocently A-ha! Ban Everything!!1! Cheers, Andy I occasioanlly open hires areas in JOSM when stumbling over them. Boy: what a whole bunch of errors one then starts to fix...! All potlatch-related I suppose (sorry Rich ;-) Roman ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
Roman Neumüller wrote: I occasioanlly open hires areas in JOSM when stumbling over them. Boy: what a whole bunch of errors one then starts to fix...! All potlatch-related I suppose (sorry Rich ;-) I'd prefer (mandy rice-davieswell, I would, wouldn't I/mandy rice-davies) all n00b-related. Blaming the editor is just neglecting our social requirement to help the new guys: plenty of people perform excellent edits in Potlatch and plenty perform lousy ones in JOSM. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Invisible-coastline-errors-in-Potlatch-tp21234805p21305508.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
2009/1/1 Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl On Wednesday 31 December 2008 18:40:18 Peter Miller wrote: Dodgy circular ways --- There are a number of islands off the Swedish coast that are showing up as errors: http://tile.openstreetmap.nl/coastlines.html?zoom=16lat=57.80195lon=11.66 246layers=B00 If one switches to a OSM view ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/?zoom=16lat=57.80195lon=11.66246layers=B00 ) one can edit them. Using 'h' I can see that they haven't been touched for months, however if I click on them the tagging looks fine and the way is shown as circular. Here is the history of one of them: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/25610508/history Notice that the way appears to be a triangle, but that the way has four points on it. If it does have an extra segment in the way then why does it show up as a circular way in Potlatch? The simples thing will probably be to delete them and recreate them but I though it was worth pointing it out first. With any circular way the first and the last nodes are the same. So to define a triangle you get four nodes in the xml. But, the problem is that often with the coastline imports, one of those nodes is a duplicate... i.e. there are really 4 nodes, but the last one is at the same point as the first... Those Swedish islands show up as errors because they are too small. Anything with a diameter of less than approximately 10 meter shows up as an error. Are you sure? or is it the previous problem? d ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
On Wednesday 31 December 2008 20:00:24 Peter Miller wrote: On 31 Dec 2008, at 18:20, Cartinus wrote: Those Swedish islands show up as errors because they are too small. Anything with a diameter of less than approximately 10 meter shows up as an error. However the checker explanation doesn't say that (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Coastline_error_checker ) What should one do... 1) Delete all features smaller than 10 meters 2) Keep them in a have loads of people go an investigate false problems 3) Make them bigger so the islands as accepted by the coastline checker 4) Adapt the coastline checker to that is accepts smaller islands. 5) Add a tag to tell the coastline checker to ignore this feature because it really is a small island. I vote for 4), everything else is a cop-out (1 and 3) or will waste lots of people time (2) or be confusing (5). By the way, who maintains the coastline checker and how does one talk to the people who maintain the code? Shouldn't there be information for all tools about how to report problems, how to request features and details of maintaining them? On Wednesday 31 December 2008 20:13:12 Karl Newman wrote: What about 6) Convert tiny islands to a node tagged as a rock or navigation hazard. See this thread for some answers: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2008-November/031934.html I've used 2), 3) and almost 6) -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
On Wednesday 31 December 2008 20:29:50 D Tucny wrote: 2009/1/1 Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl On Wednesday 31 December 2008 18:40:18 Peter Miller wrote: Here is the history of one of them: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/25610508/history Are you sure? or is it the previous problem? Try that hyperlink, then you'll know the answer too. -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
Shaun McDonald wrote: http://openstreetmap.org/browse/way/22359503/history looks like it is a 2 node way. Seems that there is a bug in Potlatch, causing it to not show the coastline here. But the way contains the same node twice, thus is meaningless. That's not a bug in Potlatch, that's dodgy data. /me looks for the created_by tag and walks away whistling innocently cheers and Happy New Year Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Invisible-coastline-errors-in-Potlatch-tp21234805p21236868.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Invisible coastline errors in Potlatch
2009/1/1 Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl On Wednesday 31 December 2008 20:29:50 D Tucny wrote: 2009/1/1 Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl On Wednesday 31 December 2008 18:40:18 Peter Miller wrote: Here is the history of one of them: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/25610508/history Are you sure? or is it the previous problem? Try that hyperlink, then you'll know the answer too. It's true! coastline checker bug... :( Sorry for doubting you... d ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
