...Or JOSM & OSM.org could interpret & list data accurately as perceived
in the real world.
Ta
DaveF
On 02/04/2017 20:51, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 2 Apr 2017, at 14:19, Andy Townsend wrote:
Maybe we should ask the JOSM maintainers to add an "open in Potlatch 2" opti
sent from a phone
> On 2 Apr 2017, at 14:19, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
> Maybe we should ask the JOSM maintainers to add an "open in Potlatch 2"
> option to allow the full history to be seen :)
+1, and also an "open in Potlatch" for seeing deleted ways in an area.
cheers,
Martin
On 02/04/2017 13:19, Andy Townsend wrote:
Maybe we should ask the JOSM maintainers to add an "open in Potlatch
2" option to allow the full history to be seen :)
Need to start with the OSM.org listing such amendments within changesets.
DaveF
---
This email has been checked for viruses by A
On 02/04/2017 11:29, Dave F wrote:
Move a node & the way's vector is amended. Common sense tells you that
the polygon has changed & needs to be listed as such. It appears that
the data takes priority over the needs of the contributors. This can't
be correct.
When in JOSM, I've sometimes used
Move a node & the way's vector is amended. Common sense tells you that
the polygon has changed & needs to be listed as such. It appears that
the data takes priority over the needs of the contributors. This can't
be correct.
DaveF.
On 02/04/2017 01:05, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a
sent from a phone
> On 1 Apr 2017, at 23:22, Dave F wrote:
>
> I'm struggling to see how this isn't a fundamentally incorrect way for
> OSM/JOSM etc to interpret the data. If nodes are moved then ways are amended
> & should be listed as such to avoid confusion & "reverting good edits made by
Hi
>Hence while the shape my have been drastically altered, the polygon
way is still the "same" it has been since you touched it 2 weeks ago.
You can see that in the history of the individual nodes.
>Potlatch uses a slightly different data model where a way's nodes are
integrated with the way,
Hi,
On 04/01/2017 12:36 AM, Dave F wrote:
> But how did the edit affect *all* nodes? Why didn't a changeset revert
> solve the issue? is this 'osmtools' publicly available or is it a
> self-written tool?
Ortholgonalizing a shape will usually move all its nodes so no surprise
there. Reverting the
That resolved it, thanks.
But how did the edit affect *all* nodes? Why didn't a changeset revert
solve the issue? is this 'osmtools' publicly available or is it a
self-written tool?
Cheers
DaveF
On 31/03/2017 23:10, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 03/31/2017 11:29 PM, Dave F wrote:
OSM's & JO
Hi,
On 03/31/2017 11:29 PM, Dave F wrote:
> OSM's & JOSM's history shows me (DaveF) as he last amender 2 months ago.
> Potlatch 1&2 show user ndm as the last one on the 28th at 22:04 although
> I can't see it listed in his changesets
ndm has only moved the *nodes* that form the polygon. Hence whi
Hi
A polygon in a multi-polygon relation has got corrupted & appears to be
orthogonalized.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/308393090#map=14/51.5352/-2.5523
OSM's & JOSM's history shows me (DaveF) as he last amender 2 months ago.
Potlatch 1&2 show user ndm as the last one on the 28th at 22:0
11 matches
Mail list logo