Hi,
Stefan de Konink wrote:
Now should the server complain?
[...]
In my perception one dimensional ways do not exist so yes it should.
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.
If the API would start to do
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,
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de wrote:
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
Matt Amos wrote:
we already do checks for data corruption, unfortunately they're
vulnerable to race conditions. 0.6 will fix that in 4 days ;-)
I can't wait ;)
If the API would start to do geometry inspection, then you'd have to add
loads of additional checks as well. For example for
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de wrote:
Matt Amos wrote:
i don't consider consecutive duplicate nodes to necessarily indicate
corrupt data. its up to the client to interpret the user's intent -
and if the user genuinely wanted consecutive duplicate nodes then
Matt Amos wrote:
we're only going to restrict them on nodes, they were already
restricted on ways and relations by the API. and most clients
restricted them on all types. in this case i look at it as being more
consistent, rather than introducing new restrictions. :-)
Btw how are you
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de wrote:
Matt Amos wrote:
we're only going to restrict them on nodes, they were already
restricted on ways and relations by the API. and most clients
restricted them on all types. in this case i look at it as being more
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
i can't think of any use for consecutive duplicate nodes, *yet*. there
might be people already using this for something, or we might find a
use for it in the future. for the moment, i consider this to be a
minor client UI bug which can be most easily fixed by the clients,
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Not that I've done it... but I might, just to prove my point!
And you use a 'way' for that... now that proves my case we can drop the
way table entirely and go for relations only ;) Now I don't blame Matt
that he wasn't there at 3am. But we had an interesting talk about
Hi all,
Some hint of Ldp to be used in OSM Fixer was trying to find ways that
are in the current form:
osm version=0.5 generator=OpenStreetMap server
way id=4073741 visible=true timestamp=2008-10-30T01:34:45+00:00
user=stev
nd ref=21558066/
nd ref=21558066/
nd ref=21558063/
nd ref=21558064/
10 matches
Mail list logo
