You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 24, 2021. It is now read-only.
The API should support a much better method to access that data which solves all these problems.
Best would be to pass data as individual track segments.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Author: tom[at]compton.nu [Added to the original trac issue at 1.37pm, Tuesday, 17th February 2009]
I am not responsible for the fact that the Potlatch author decided to sneak round these restrictions, although I probably am culpable for deploying them without insisting on changes.
Author: xeen [Added to the original trac issue at 12.36pm, Saturday, 21st February 2009]
So it's actually not a bug in JOSM but Potlatch? If it's about privacy JOSM's "track guessing" is probably too much already. Clarification would be great, so we can support the actual intention.
Author: cyron[at]winboard.org [Added to the original trac issue at 7.45pm, Sunday, 13th September 2009]
The question is how it is a privacy problem to serve points in it's order (as ways) if there is no connection to a user, and ... it would be nice to ask a user questions to tracks ...
So maybe it should be selectable for users if the tracks should be published under a pseudonym or with anonymous like this.
Thats one of the major reasons why I doesn't upload gps tracks, because nobody knows how the track was created, like I walk along the road on the sidewalk or something like this, and the next user use it for the center line of the street.
Reporter: stoecker
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 12.45pm, Tuesday, 17th February 2009]
JOSM uses the GPX point download API and has lots of problems with it:
The API should support a much better method to access that data which solves all these problems.
Best would be to pass data as individual track segments.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: