[OSM-dev] Fixing the history tab

[Alex Barth]

Pawel, i do not understand how the New History Tab will scale and how it
will be fast. Right now it's slow.

The old owl fell over b/c of scale problems and my understanding is that
the underlying technical challenge of how to make massive changesets
browsable in rev chronological order on a map is unsolved.  I must be
missing something, I don't think you have explained this anywhere.

I'd realy like to understand, where can I read up?

On Friday, May 3, 2013, Paweł Paprota wrote:

> IMHO people really should put their minds to fixing *the* problem of
> "Querying all changesets that actually modified data in an arbitrary
> bounding box of the world and displaying them in reverse chronological
> order is computationally expensive" instead of coming up with yet another
> half way solution.
>
> It looks nice as such tools often do but does not solve the problem
> properly - why not use the time to help out with OWL / New History Tab
> instead of starting another project from scratch?
>
> Anyway, let me use this opportunity to give people a quick update about
> OWL and the History Tab Beta.
>
> As is painfully obvious from my "Contributions" graphic on Github[1], I've
> not been active at all in OSM since late February. Coincidentally, I
> started at my new job at that time...
>
> Currently I am on a two-month work trip in Germany with not much free time
> but I really miss OSM and OWL development so I plan to get back to it some
> time in June when I'm back at home.
>
> When you look at it, there is really not a lot of stuff to be done before
> OWL and New History Tab can be rolled out to production. Mainly there are
> UI tweaks to be done so it looks nicer - that's why I'm a bit sad that no
> one volunteered to help out with JS/CSS - it's the easy part of the
> project...
>
> On the backend side (OWL), there is support for relation to be added which
> is a gigantic challenge but I think this could be scheduled for 2.0...
>
> In any case, please consider helping out with the project, especially the
> frontend side, as it is not that far from being in
> potentially-mergable-state.
>
> [1] https://github.com/ppawel
>
> Paweł
>
> On 05/02/2013 05:18 PM, Alex Barth wrote:
>
>> At this weekend's Chicago hack weekend Tom and I worked on a prototype
>> that could be a viable solution for our currently broken history tab. It
>> is taking a very different approach in comparison to Pawel's history tab
>> [1] by not showing the entire history up front, but only latest changes
>> to visible elements. I wrote up the details in a diary entry, would love
>> to hear peoples thoughts on this. I think from a user story perspective
>> this would work and it would be much cheaper to implement than a fast
>> historic changeset browser.
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/**user/lxbarth/diary/19185<http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/19185>
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/pipermail/talk/2013-**
>> January/065556.html<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2013-January/065556.html>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/dev<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev>
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/dev<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20130503/0cc1b794/attachment.html>