On Sat, 16 Aug 2008, Dermot McNally wrote: >> This information is shown in the ToolTip. You get this when waiting a >> short time over the error message. > > Ah yes, so it is... It does force me to mouseover each violation, > though. For a large or detailed area, this is going to be very > impractical.
Suggestions welcome. >> Actually this is already implemented. It's only moved to the ToolTip for >> two reasons: >> >> a) There is so little space there in the Validator window > > True - but to me, the existing top-level message isn't actually > useful, and could easily be replaced with the more specific message. > Furthermore, if I decide (as I am likely to) that it will be generally > acceptable for tertiary roads in my area not to have ref attributes, I > would value the ability to collapse and ignore a whole set of > violations. As it is, I'm going to have to search through a list of > acceptable violations to find the ones I really care about. You can ignore them once and for all the time :-) Don't know how make an ignore for specific tests in the test-set. But it's a new feature. Give it some time to mature. >> b) When I change the generic error message, the valdition dialog will be >> filled with lots of different message types. This makes finding certain >> types more difficult. > > Which types? As far as I can see, the only violations that will be > separated based on my suggestions are the ones that are already unlike > each other. Yes. The other validation types. Think of e.g. 30 different TagChecker types and one unclosed way. You wont find it in this batch of TagChecker stuff. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available) _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
