Very nice that the main map now shows a link as standard, but why does
the format have to be changed? Now JOSM needs to be changed because it
does not recognise this type of link.
What was wrong with the old lat= and lon= style? From this link I can
not see what the latitude and longitude is. I
On 2013-08-08 09:08, Maarten Deen wrote:
Very nice that the main map now shows a link as standard, but why does
the format have to be changed? Now JOSM needs to be changed because it
does not recognise this type of link.
What was wrong with the old lat= and lon= style? From this link I can
not
Hi Maarten,
the benefit with the new link format, where position and layers are
constantly stored in the part after the hash (#) is that browsers don't
need or assume to need a reload.
If you change the address (before the #) completely, a reload of the
page is necessary, that was the case up to
Is it really a terrible weight to update JOSM to recognize the new format?
Given that JOSM is on version 6,115 and this is essentially a 'changing a
regex' type situation.
Can we stop calling any feature that changes the behavior of the site a
major step backwards? Yes, things are different and
+1
I think, it's easy to exchange in josm.
The bigger problem here would be the big amount of links TO osm.org, bu
these are already addressed by the current page and redirected to the
new format, so that's no problem either.
I hope it was an accident that you responded to my mail instead of
tmcw wrote
Is it really a terrible weight to update JOSM to recognize the new format?
It is not just about JOSM, the change breaks *every application, web service
or browser plugin* that creates a reference to the osm main page or that
could parse an OSM url.
That's a little bit more :-).
It is not just about JOSM, the change breaks *every application, web
service or browser plugin* that creates a reference to the osm main page or
that could parse an OSM url.
Links to the homepage are backwards-compatible. We've set up redirects.
No. If you just go ahead with changes that break
From: NopMap [mailto:ekkeh...@gmx.de]
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 7:34 AM
To: dev@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] The new link on the OSM map
tmcw wrote
Is it really a terrible weight to update JOSM to recognize the new
format?
It is not just about JOSM, the change breaks
On 2013-08-08 14:49, Tom MacWright wrote:
Is it really a terrible weight to update JOSM to recognize the new
format? Given that JOSM is on version 6,115 and this is essentially a
'changing a regex' type situation.
Is that a reason to do it? Because other changes are not hard? What _is_
the
And do you know what it is? Somebody puts a request somewhere that they
want it changed, some coder implements it and only then the world knows
about it and the rest of the world has to change their behaviour because
one person wanted it changed. Do-ocracy at work.
Please read Paul's message
Maarten Deen wrote:
What planet are you on?
That level of abuse is _completely_ unwarranted. I think you owe Tom an
apology.
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/The-new-link-on-the-OSM-map-tp5772913p5772987.html
Sent from the Developer Discussion
Hi,
This is not as much fun as complaining about something, but
- The new sharing page is fantastic.
- I love the fact that the url is updating as you move around, making
it possible to just copy/paste the url from the url bar.
- The previous design always bugged the crap out of me when it
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 07:33:40 -0700 (PDT)
NopMap ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
tmcw wrote
Is it really a terrible weight to update JOSM to recognize the new
format?
It is not just about JOSM, the change breaks *every application, web
service or browser plugin* that creates a reference to the osm
Hi.
The ticket was there already, I added a patch now:
http://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/8945
regards
Peter
Am 08.08.2013 09:08, schrieb Maarten Deen:
Very nice that the main map now shows a link as standard, but why does
the format have to be changed? Now JOSM needs to be changed because it
On 2013-08-08 17:47, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Maarten Deen wrote:
What planet are you on?
That level of abuse is _completely_ unwarranted. I think you owe Tom an
apology.
I have read my command again and after Tom's hyperbole that I claim you
did a bad thing entirely I see no reason to
HI,
On 08/08/13 19:02, Peter Wendorff wrote:
The ticket was there already, I added a patch now
Thanks. I have applied the patch and closed the ticket. Tonight's
josm-latest will then support the new URL scheme, and we can all happily
live on the same planet again.
Bye
Frederik
--
Tom's hyperbole that I claim you did a bad thing entirely
I was referring to:
I'm sorry, but IMHO this is yet another step backward.
'Yet another step backward', outside of the expression two steps forward,
another step back means 'a bad thing in general' in common usage. Perhaps
you were
On 2013-08-08 19:33, Tom MacWright wrote:
Tom's hyperbole that I claim you did a bad thing entirely
I was referring to:
I'm sorry, but IMHO this is yet another step backward.
'Yet another step backward', outside of the expression two steps
forward, another step back means 'a bad thing in
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote:
I'm sorry, but IMHO this is yet another step backward.
I don't know how it's hard to see that this is an offensive liner to anyone
who works on openstreetmap.org. Sorry. yet another alludes to a steady
decline brought about
As there are redirects I do not see an issue here and I really like the
progress which is going on!
... why not introduce a policy how to make changes to osm.org to avoid
'social' or other issues in the future?
I would suggest instead of discussion everything on the dev mailing
list, do it like
20 matches
Mail list logo
