<html><head></head><body>Actually, if you find the way to keep a db handling a property (or tag) of OSM element in sync with OSM, you have solved the need for UID. And if you happen to do so without UID or API change , it's very nice ! <br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">Le 2 octobre 2017 15:59:48 GMT+02:00, Christoph Hormann <osm@imagico.de> a écrit :<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail"><br />With all the recent endeavors to push more automated edits in OSM and <br />with the related rules and policies clearly failing (just look at <br /><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log</a> and <br />compare that to what is actually taking place in terms of automated <br />edits these days) i just had the idea that it might be a lot easier and <br />better if we replace all current regulations of automated edits with a <br />simple rule:<br /><br />Automated edits of any kind may freely add or edit tags with keys <br />starting with 'bot:' but may not under any circumstances touch any <br />other tags.<br /><br />This way people could go crazy bot editing whatever they want in that <br />namespace but would not interfere with manual mapping activity and data <br />consumers could choose freely if the want bot edited information and if <br />they do if they want to give it priority over manually verified data. <br />And mappers could configure their editors to hide the bot tags if they <br />are not interested in them.<br /><br />Of course considering the big volume of editing activity that would <br />likely take place in the 'bot:' namespace in that scenario it might be <br />a good idea to put those tags into a separate database for efficiency <br />reasons.<br /></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>