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 to be presented with a dialog box that explains the problem in > simple terms before allowing them to either continue with the delete or > seek assistance. If the user requires assistance a note could be opened > stating something along the lines of "I require assistance deleting > element x for reason y, please help me.".
Which sort of ties in with my constraints on relations. If an edit is breaking something it's easy enough to say "unable to proceed because ... " but ideally the API should be able to find a new missing bit and add it into the relation? Only blocking something when the new edit does create a conflict because the relation is now broken? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
