[OSM-talk] Admin borders/separate database

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2013/11/6 Peter Wendorff <wendorff at uni-paderborn.de>

> +1
> and I would like to combine it:
> JOSMs filtering  feature is a really great starting point but it could
> be extended by a "layering filter view" which
> - defines layers by filters where one at a time can be selected for editing
> - provides a preset system to allow people to select the "border layer"
> or the "water layer" or the "highway/road/path infrastructure layer" in
> an abstract way without having to fiddle around with tag-specific
> filtering syntax on his own.
>


you specifiy which kind of objects you intend to modify (or select a
preselection by topic someelse has provided) and the rest will be greyed
out (or maybe invisible or only lines visible in grey but nodes not or with
reduced size) and locked (not selectable, also not by select all, etc.), so
you would be able to modify all specific stuff, also that which is glued to
other stuff (and that other stuff would also be modified together if it is
the same OSM object). This would IMHO be better than actual layers, because
in my understanding with a real layer approach modifying something on one
layer would not modify stuff on other layers (i.e. there would be
node/way/rel copies in case the same geometry objects were used as well for
other stuff than the selected).

There might still be problems with geometry (eg. nodes) used multiple times
for different ways or stuff part of relations (where the relation is not in
the set that should be modified but would be implicitly modified anyway),
were a user could potentially modify something he doesn't want to, now
without even noticing because the effects on these other objects are hidden
(could raise editor warnings for this kind of stuff maybe), but if you
don't do it like this you will soon end up with lots of overlapping nodes
and ways.

cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20131106/e3e14b15/attachment-0001.html>