[OSM-dev] 0.6 API clarifications and corrections

Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog at gmail.com
Wed May 14 22:40:40 BST 2008

Now who is unilaterally making decisions? :) Sorry the wiki wasn't clear enough.

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 7:52 PM, bvh <bvh-osm at irule.be> wrote:
> - When updating or deleting an object, the wiki
> says you need to include an attribute old_version with the version
> on which you base the changes (opportunistic locking).
> The server however looks for a tag named "version" and not
> "old_version".
> I shall change the wiki to reflect this.

It's supposed to be old_version and that what JOSM implements but I'm
fine either way. The reasoning being that it's clearly not the version
being uploaded and in some contexts (diff output) you might want
old_version and new_version.

> - When creating, updating or deleting a single object the wiki
> says that you need to add the changeset and old_version attributes
> but does not state on which tag. crschmidt and me agreed on IRC
> that
> * the changeset attribute should be on the osm tag
> * the version attribute should be on the object tag

At the hackathon we had quite a bit of discussion about this and we
decided they should both go on the object tag (the reason escapes me
right now, I'm sure it will come to me. something to do with being
consistant with how the data will be retreived). This is also what
JOSM implements.

But I'm fine either way...

Just as long as we end up with one way of doing it and not lots of variations.

Have a nice day,
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog at gmail.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/

More information about the dev mailing list