2016-11-20 For most of my OSM mapping I use the iD editor. It's not really the technology I'd like to use, but the editor is well optimized for usability. There's a lot of good usability value and also of ease presented to the user. Thus IMO iD is a path to the future, besides, the developers are super active. JOSM, although definitely being the best editor, is no choice for me as I don't want to install Java on my computers. It's the same for Potlatch, because Flash is also a blacklisted technology for me. Now I've tried Merkaartor. It's written in C++ and Qt -- neither do I like but they still are better than Java. I first had some problems installing Merkaartor. IIRC I couldn't compile the la- test dev version from the VCS, because it depended on a Qt ver- sion that was not available for my Debian oldstable. But when I checked-out the latest release version 0.18.3, I was able to com- pile it. It took some hours for getting used to the Merkaartor way of do- ing things, which, compared to iD, is more complicated, more clicking and such. But of course, Merkaartor provides more edit- ing actions, like splitting areas and such stuff. The main reason I use Merkaartor, however, is the ability to display the Maps4BW WMS layer. Very unfortunate, in my eyes, is Merkaartor's inability to con- trol the changeset tags. There's no difference to iD in this respect. All in all, Merkaartor tends to die. There is so much more development power behind iD and JOSM; Merkaartor cannot catch up with them. And besides the technology choice there is no reason to prefer Merkaartor over the others. Merkaartor is okay, but it does not excel in any field. It only can act as a fallback for situations like mine. http://marmaro.de/lue/ markus schnalke