Hi, Am Tue, 02 Aug 2011 16:32:29 +0200 schrieb Frederik Ramm <[email protected]>:
> > I think you are again making the mistake of mixing various layers of > meaning. If someone deletes an object in OSM to trace it anew, from > better imagery for example, then he is creating a new model, and the > old model ceases to exist. It is perfectly ok for a link to the old > model to return 404. If someone is doing a web page describing a car (ie a model of a physical car) and he decides to make the description of that car (ie the web page) prettier then what I expect as a user of this web page is that the old URI's are still valid. (HTTP 301 or 200) If he does a complete redesign of his website, then I expect links to be broken. (404) It depends on the case. The problem with OSM is, that a move of an object abstraction (ie the ID) like HTTP 301 is not possible yet. > > (On the other hand, it may be possible for someone to move a model of > a house in OSM by 200 metres and the HTTP return code would still not > be 301 ;) > > > The same logic should apply to OSM ID's/URI's > > As I said, if there is a mistake here then it is probably in your > expectation, not in what OSM is doing; and it may be our fault to > have given you that expectation by using a REST interface. We should > take care to make clear on the Wiki that OSM is a database of models > of things - models that may vanish at any time - and not a database > of things. All I expect is logic. It is irrelevant if an OSM ID describes an object or a model of an object. Because models can also be moved, therefore there should be a possibility to move the model ID. -- Greg _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
