|
Re: [OSM-dev] negative segment id in planet.osm? planet-061205.osm: msg#00089gis.openstreetmap.devel
isn't the table marked unsigned? in this case there'd be a displaying error: in binary the bit 0 (first bit) is used to set the sign, if the number grew over the "positive"-range, then it may be incorrecty displayed as negative even if it's a positive number.. On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 13:05 +0100, Joerg Ostertag (OSM Munich/Germany) wrote: > I think this is not on purpose or is it? > Some examples: > <way id="3697840" timestamp="2006-10-16T10:08:03+01:00"> > <seg id="-3" /> > <tag k="name" v="Hope St" /> > <tag k="created_by" v="osmeditor2" /> > <tag k="highway" v="unclassified" /> > </way> > <way id="3697842" timestamp="2006-10-16T10:08:06+01:00"> > <seg id="-4" /> > <tag k="name" v="Circus ST" /> > <tag k="created_by" v="osmeditor2" /> > <tag k="highway" v="unclassified" /> > </way> > |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: [OSM-dev] [OSM-talk] Yahoo!: 00089, Nick Whitelegg |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [OSM-dev] negative segment id in planet.osm? planet-061205.osm: 00089, raphael Jacquot |
| Previous by Thread: | [OSM-dev] negative segment id in planet.osm? planet-061205.osmi: 00089, Joerg Ostertag (OSM Munich/Germany) |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [OSM-dev] negative segment id in planet.osm? planet-061205.osm: 00089, raphael Jacquot |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |