Sometimes Potlach warns about many mapping objects and gives the option to zoom in to a smaller area. Yet this is rather inconvenient when drawing large objects (waterways). It would be better if Potlach had an option to remove small objects (e.g. buildings, POIs, etc). Is this somehow possible?
Best would be if it could be choosen which objects were (or weren’t) drawn.
Wyo
For your purposes I really recommend to use JOSM instead of Potlatch.
In JOSM you can switch the display mode to a kind of simple wireframe display. Or even better: There is a filter option where you can choose which objekts are displayed or not.
Please report us about success or failure.
PS: I even don’t think that big new features will be implemented in Potlatch, because the alph atesting of Potlatch 2 has already started.
Sorry I’m not going to install Java on my desktop!
Well for adding some small correction, a web interface is sufficient. Uploading tracks (Canal de la Marne au Rhin), making correction based on these tracks and adding informations (locks) is all I want to do. Yet Potlach in some areas simply need too long (up to 10 min) to load data an render them. Reducing data is the answer either by scaling down or leaving away small objects.
When is Potlach2 possibly finished? Is there a testing web page and/or wiki?
I’m afraid the API doesn’t offer the facility for Potlatch, or any other editor, to only download objects of a certain type. In any event it would be very, very difficult to implement because OSM doesn’t have any concept of separate feature layers. If you had only downloaded certain features, and then you deleted a way, then you’d probably get an error on uploading because some of the deleted nodes would be shared with other objects.
By and large any slowness in Potlatch is due to download speeds, not render speeds.
If you’ve not found Potlatch 2 already (and judging by your wiki bug reports I think maybe you have 
) it’s at http://www.geowiki.com/ currently.
I admit I don’t know the internals of OSM yet I’m astonished that OSM should not allow for separate feature sets. If I had started OSM I’d have designed them right from the start. Most of the time not all (better said just some) features are needed by requestors and allowing for feature sets would not only lower download times but also server loads. IMO this should be one of the high priority issue.
When one deletes an object there’s always the problem of shared nodes, regardless if they are downloaded or not. Shared nodes should not be deleted unless they aren’t shared by another object anymore.
I’ve already found it and played around a little. IMO it’s even now about 100 times faster than Potlach (including download time) on my old computer.
Wyo