Hi,
On 05/29/2012 01:33 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
1. OSM Inspectors's license change view does not take this list into
account, i.e. the areas thus "remapped" still look clean on OSMI even
though they will be dropped later.
Wow - that's bad. Is there a reason this can't be implemented quickly?
Doesn't it already have the concept in the positive direction with the
listed "clean" changesets?
There is a reason this can't be implemented quickly, yes. In its
internal database, OSMI keeps the full history of any object ever
touched by a non-agreer; objects that have never been touched by a
non-agreer don't even make it into the database (and since non-agreers
cannot edit, this database can only get smaller, never larger).
The concept of CT agreers making "tainted" edits means that additional
objects will have to be injected into the database. This doesn't sound
like a big issue but the whole system has been constructed around the
idea that objects are never added.
I'm sure I can find some way to do it but its likely to be a kludge.
Is the functionality the same on the JOSM license plugin?
Yes.
Looking at the description of the first set and random samples of the
next two, it seems they are all in Europe. Is that correct?
Off the top of my head, I'm not aware of any cases outside Europe. There
are a few things under investigation that haven't yet made it to the
list but I believe that's Europe too.
The last three are not linked. Is there a reason for that, or should I
fix it? It might be useful to give at least overall bbox info - I'll
work on that.
Adding links quadruples the amount of data on the page so I'm not a huge
fan of links (don't trust Mediawiki) but if you think it is useful...
where usernames are given, Pascal's "OSM heatmap" is a good indication
of where that user was active.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [email protected] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
