[OSM-talk] Potlatch licence status highlighting wrong?

[Dave F.]

 From my observations I think both Potlatch & Geofabrik do not have 
foolproof systems in place.

OSM inspector is listing some ways as "harmless" yellow where the most 
recent edits will be removed down to the declining contributor. This 
should be flagged orange. Potlatch isn't even displaying these.

It's a shame they couldn't co-ordinate to use the same colour scheme.

Dave F.


On 18/01/2012 11:19, woll wrote:
> For way 3256123 (the anti-clockwise carriageway of the M25), Potlatch doesn't
> seem to highlight it when the 'Show licence status' option is enabled.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.322365&lon=-0.45067&zoom=18&layers=M
>
> It was created by a non-agreer, so shouldn't it be highlighted? It is a
> member of a relation (which therefore means it has 'relation' highlighting,
> but shouldn't the licence highlighting be displayed 'on top' of that (I
> think I have seen that in other cases, but maybe I'm imagining that)?
>
> It is highlighted in the OpenStreetMap Inspector view:
> http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfe&lon=-0.45038&lat=51.32242&zoom=18&overlays=overview,wtfe_point_clean,wtfe_line_clean,wtfe_point_modified,wtfe_line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_created_cp,wtfe_line_created
>
> wtfe returns "Undecided":
> http://wtfe.gryph.de/api/0.6/problems?ways=3256123
>
> There are still some nodes remaining from the original user, so I would also
> have expected those nodes to be highlighted, but they aren't:
> http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=3256123
>
> Any ideas? Maybe my understanding of how the highlighting should work is
> mistaken?
>
> --
> View this message in context:http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Potlatch-licence-status-highlighting-wrong-tp7199815p7199815.html
> Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>