On Nov 6, 2009, at 6:38 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
> Michal Migurski writes:
>> instead make sure that multi-level undo is completely bulletproof.
>
> To make life more interesting, OSM editing goes on concurrently, and
> yet nearly everyone who is editing is editing a chunk locally. So OSM
> is episodically being synched with chunks of data we call a
> "changeset", but which also includes the concept of an "edit conflict"
> meaning that two chunks have been edited at the same time.
>
> Simultaneous editing of geodata is currently not a solved problem.
> Even less solved is the concept of multi-level undo, much less
> single-level undo. Within an editing session? Sure. Within your
> chunk of data? Sure. But not outside that.
I think this further underscores the difference between save mode and
edit mode. Save mode is more like traditional desktop document
editing, and the undo history need only be consistent with what you're
doing in your own session. In this case, it should be possible to
ditch the locked ways and instead make sure that the local document is
fully self-consistent and undo-able.
For live mode, clearly an undo feature would introduce more trouble
than it's worth, for everyone involved in editing a particular area.
There the presence of locked or ghosted ways as in the current
Potlatch does make sense, but I do think the terminology and visual
presentation could be tweaked a bit. I know what you mean about this
not being a solved problem, and given how much time I spend with SVN,
Git, etc. I'm pretty aware of how hard it can be to merge concurrent
edits on the same resource.
-mike.
----------------------------------------------------------------
michal migurski- m...@stamen.com
415.558.1610
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
