[OSM-dev] Grumble, grumble
tom at compton.nu
Mon May 11 09:10:31 BST 2009
Maarten Deen wrote:
>> No it doesn't; if you do a "map" query against the API, you will *not*
>> receive deleted objects, and that's what JOSM does in step 4. It would
>> not be feasible to query each object individually.
> Why not? How is this different from a user having to go through all his
> changes manually and download every node/way he changed manually?
It's not feasible because it would be a very quick way for JOSM to get
itself banned if it started trying to download every single object in an
area individually like this.
>> However one thing that JOSM could do is compare the list of objects in
>> memory with those returned by the "map" query and thus find out which
>> ones are "missing" from the map query, then request those individually
>> to confirm they are really "410 Gone".
> Well, depending on how you downloaded the data in the first place. It is not
> said that the data came from a download in JOSM.
If there data didn't come from the API then there can't be a conflict of
this sort as the objects would be new objects and therefore couldn't
have already been deleted on the server.
>> The latter (it is exactly the way as used in 0.5). But it does not
>> upload the changes in the order you made them, instead it first uploads
>> all creations, then all modifications, then all deletions.
> By doing it that way, does it give an errormessage with the offending node/way
> id? That would be really helpful.
Recent versions of JOSM already report the detailed error message that
the server sends to the user - that should include details of the
Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
More information about the dev