[OSM-dev] Note to the developers of editors :)
Stefan de Konink
stefan at konink.de
Mon Apr 13 19:09:15 BST 2009
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I don't think it should. The API makes no claim that a way is some
> geometric object; a way is just a collection of nodes.
Like discussed on IRC yesterday /my/ opinion is clear; if there is or
will be an enforcement on length because of 'client/server' interaction,
check for actual corruption must be trivial too add, an the only thing
useful for our data collection.
> If the API would start to do geometry inspection, then you'd have to add
> loads of additional checks as well. For example for self-intersecting
> areas or ways with length==0 even because first and last node, while
> being different, have the same coordinates, and whatnot.
Lets check for it :) (I'm serious) I was even surprised we seem to go on
PostgreSQL but don't go PostGIS.
>> As always OSM fixer is on rampage to filter about 6000 plus ways,
>> leaving 4492 matches, of them 405 become one-way-ways. Relations
>> haven't been found duplicate in this way.
> As long as you fix things that are obviously completely broken, like
> ways referring to deleted nodes, that's fine. But if you venture into
> the "this makes no sense to me so I'll fix it", it might be better to
> discuss your ideas on this list *beforehand* rather than just tell us
> afterwards what your bot is doing (or has done).
I have discussed this the previous night on IRC. And 'this makes no
sense', did not come from me, but a few days ago from someone else. But
please speak up if you know anything useful with sequential duplication
for members. I cannot :)
More information about the dev