[openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website] Quirk on changeset bbox calculation (#1742)

[Matt Amos]

Yup, it is intentional behaviour. Whether it's still the best behaviour is a good question. Since the code now keeps a running count of the number of changes within the changeset itself: https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/blob/b5ff4bfbe658fc21f2cf038809fd696d92b1f8f7/app/models/changeset.rb#L142-L148 then this behaviour is simply confusing.

It looks like we would get more predictable behaviour just by leaving the `EXPAND` parameter out and allowing `margin` to default to zero, although there'd probably need to be adjustments to the test suite. https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/blob/b5ff4bfbe658fc21f2cf038809fd696d92b1f8f7/lib/bounding_box.rb#L35

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1742#issuecomment-364919729
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/rails-dev/attachments/20180212/22fb3a50/attachment.html>