Better test case is "node/1" ( https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2015/12/25/openstreetmappy-christmas/ ) * https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1/history
2018-03-06 11:26 GMT+01:00 Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org>: > Hi, > > we're all concerned about the environment these days. "Reduce, Reuse, > Recycle" is certainly something to strive for in the real world out there. > > However, for the second time now I've encountered a user who thought it > was a good idea to reclaim old node IDs for new edits. A couple of > long-deleted TIGER nodes were raised from the dead, and put to use in > mapping some new roads on the other side of the planet. > > This sounds like a funny/quirky thing to do, and looks harmless enough > on the surface. But anyone who ever looks at the history of things > *will* be totally confused. Nobody who works with historic data will > expect that a U.S. bus stop could become a tree in Romania. People are > bound to interpret this in any number of wrong ways. It also messes up > my full history extracts, where you'll now find the occasional German > hiking route in the California data extract because a node that used to > be in California is now part of a path that belongs to the hiking route. > > Long story short, please don't do it - let the API assign you new node > IDs to your stuff instead of building ingenious contraptions to recycle > old nodes. > > Thanks > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
