If you go to api.openstreetmap.org in your browser it is expected that it redirects to www.openstreetmap.org.
Shaun On 1 Dec 2013, at 04:11, Andrew Errington <erringt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why can't I upload with JOSM today? Is it related to the new UI changes? > > I get this error: > Failed to open a connection to the remote > server 'http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/'. Host > name 'api.openstreetmap.org' could not be resolved. Please check the API URL > in your preferences and your internet connection. > > Has the URL for the API changed? Nothing has changed at my end. > > I notice that "api.openstreetmap.org" takes me to the map. Is that right? > > Best wishes, > > Andrew > > > > > On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 10:43:53 Paul Norman wrote: >>> From: Lester Caine [mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk] >>> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2013 1:51 PM >>> To: talk@openstreetmap.org >>> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Welcome box on the new map page >>> >>> Which is why I simply ask that the old layout is made available again as >> >> that >> >>> only requires access to pages that already exist. >> >> There would be time costs in supporting the code for what are essentially >> duplicates of other pages. You have to test every change against both sets >> of pages, and then there is the distinct code that appears in one but not >> the other. >> >>> What is currently being offered is probably acceptable to users who are >>> there with a view to contributing, and then requiring registration makes >>> sense, but for the vast majority of visitors brought here by USERS of >>> the data it's just not right. >> >> In EWG I brought up the opinion that a UI change should be evaluated on a) >> how well it converts visitors to mappers b) how well it retains >> visitors. Of course these are hard to measure, and it's not like the old >> site was rigerously evaluated against these criteria. >> >> The new site seems to be much better at directing visitors into becoming >> mappers. I have also shown it to inexperienced and new mappers and they >> found it an improvement. >> >>> I know that there is a lot of support for NOT providing services >> >> I'd say there's a wide desire for offering services like OWL and routing >> on OSM.org. Of course, these take development hours, time, and money, so >> a wide desire doesn't translate into actually adding the services. >> >>> but until a suitable replacement can be created for the many thousands of >> >> us >> >>> using embeded maps, maintaining usable operation is important. The >>> current changes are not compatible with using the embed function so THAT >>> should have beendepricated first and time provided for us to make >>> changes to existing usage! >> >> I looked at the embed HTML generated, and I don't see what doesn't work. >> All the links are valid, and the page that you land (the front page) >> seems more likely to covert the visitor to a mapper, because it now >> gives some text to explain where they've ended up. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk