Matt Amos wrote: > at a current mapping party everything works just fine. frederik has > already explained how JOSM is going to deal with this and it doesn't > need bbox locking on the DB. i assume richard is planning something > similar for potlatch (?).
I am still sure people would love to see XAPI requests to overcome the current information overload. But that is typically clientside. > bbox locking has its own problems, including easy DDOS, lack of > concurrency, etc... but consider the mapping party example. if there > is a way intersecting two editors' bboxes and they both lock their > bboxes. now, neither of them can edit that way since it intersects the > other's locked bbox. API 0.7 will of course implement partial ways too ;) Having the bbox as a viewport. I don't see an easy way of DDOS unless you have a zillion of users all locking *=*. Concurrency is perfectly possible, what you don't edit is not locked (or if requested: hidden). Stefan _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
