Post #1570907
2026-01-29 10:19 UTC
@simon @utf_7 Thanks, yeah that makes sense.
Replies (1)
-
@simon@en.osm.town 2026-01-29 10:27
@felixcremer @utf_7 I didn't mention this, but should have: prior to OSM API 0.5 (October 2007) objects were not versioned, the original "node 1" was deleted prior to that date and therefore doesn't actually exist in the current OSM data at all. The current "node 1" is a reuse of the old id IIRC.