[OSM-dev] disputed areas

[Ray Booysen]

On Feb 10, 2008 1:08 PM, bvh <bvh-osm at irule.be> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 01:10:14PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > This is beginning to get rather messy. TBH as a community not
> > rendering the area in question is the only bargaining chip we have. Or
> > slightly less extreme solution, drop the rendering of names. At the
> > end of the day there's not much we can do against people who can't
> > accept the fact that a place may have multiple names.
>
> I like the solution with the protected range
>
> - have the create node api check if the node is in a protected area,
> if yes check the user and if allowed give the node an id in a reserved
> range
>
> - have the create way/relationship api check if any of the member
> nodes/ways
> are from the reserved range and if so check the user and if allowed give
> the way/relationship an id in a reserved range
>
> - have the edit/delete api check if the id in question is from the
> reserved range and if so check the user
>
> Granted, I don't know ruby nor the api implementation but the
> above seems doable to implement?
>

Reserved Id ranges?  Seems a little overkill.  How about a protected bit on
the node/way instead?





>
> > On a different note, if you setup a process that monitored the nodes
> > in question and simply reverted any edits within five minutes of doing
> > them (currently technically feasable) how long before people get tired
> > of changing them?
>
> What would prevent those people from writing their own bot to execute
> the changes?
>
> cu bart
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>



-- 
Ray Booysen
raybooysen at rjb.za.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20080210/623473d7/attachment.html>