On 05/10/14 09:49, Lester Caine wrote:
there
should be a block on the deleted element being removed until the
'damage' is repaired. Something that JOSM at least tries to help with,
but iD ignores?
Where the damage is the breaking of a relation, iD is not ignoring it,
it is actively but
On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 00:35:20 +0100
David Woolley for...@david-woolley.me.uk wrote:
I think iD has taken totally the wrong approach. If the concept is
too difficult for the target audience, it should have refused the
operation, rather than hidden the problem.
Simply refusing to delete seems
On 05/10/14 11:25, Andy Street wrote:
I think iD has taken totally the wrong approach. If the concept is
too difficult for the target audience, it should have refused the
operation, rather than hidden the problem.
Simply refusing to delete seems rather unhelpful. I'd much prefer
the user
On 04/10/14 01:47, Antje (OpenStreetMap) wrote:
Even the Inner ring road is damaged (3124618
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3124618).
This is the only specific one you identified. I assume you are
referring to http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25784400 which has
the blank
On 04/10/14 09:57, David Woolley wrote:
This was done with iD which has a bad reputation for collateral damage,
and without a sensible commit comment, it is difficult to work out what
was intended, but I suspect that this relatively new editor is not
actually malicious. That might have to be
On 04/10/2014 10:14, David Woolley wrote:
... it is probably a mistaken attempt at personal mapping.
That's what it looked like to me, certainly.
The big problem with relations is that they tend to be subject to
frequent edits, so reverts may fail, because they would take out a
Perhaps the principle OSM editors could emit a warning whenever an edit
is undertaken which could invalidate a relation, also noting how many
other ways would be affected. This at least would give mappers a chance
to consider carefully whether they really know what they are doing.
Roger
On
On 04/10/14 21:58, Roger Calvert wrote:
Perhaps the principle OSM editors could emit a warning whenever an edit
is undertaken which could invalidate a relation, also noting how many
other ways would be affected. This at least would give mappers a chance
to consider carefully whether they really
Hi,
On 10/05/2014 01:35 AM, David Woolley wrote:
Note that both of them fix up the relations, by removing the member, so
the relation is never structurally invalid
The API would not allow deleting a way that is still member of a
relation, so relations will (barring API bugs) always be
Suddenly I came back to the map just to find that my new bus relations are
damaged by some vandal. I’m not rebuilding it. I give up.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
I sympathise Antje, I'm frustrated by vandals in my area (who really
should know better, given the length of time they've been active).
Post the links for your edits so we can have a look.
Cheers
Dave F.
On 04/10/2014 01:22, Antje (OpenStreetMap) wrote:
Suddenly I came back to the map just
Here is the list of London bus routes for starters:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bus_routes_in_London
The ones that I dramatically improved are the new-style route_master relations,
which are: 3, 4, 8-11, 18, 19, 21, 24, 30, 38, 43, 49, 57, 73, 76, 100, 144,
148, 192, 205, 277, 341, 390,
12 matches
Mail list logo
