On 22.03.2014 11:01, Richard Z. wrote: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 05:05:21PM -0500, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On Mar 21, 2014 4:59 PM, "Richard Z." <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Example of a problem this should catch: I have seen cases where someone >>> wanted to tag a simple bridge with layer and added the layer to the wrong >>> segment - tagging a hundred or more miles of road accidentally, possibly >>> affecting crossings far away for an area not downloaded. The validator >> will >>> not detect it and in most cases the renderer will work around this bug >> very >>> well so it is only discovered by accident in most cases. >>> This is not limited to layer, I have seen the same problem with culverts >> and >>> bridges. >> >> This seems like something a validator should be able to catch without >> overly complicating how levels work. > > I am not trying to complicate how layers work right now but trying to codify > how they already work in >99% of cases in easy to follow rules that could be > utilised by validators. > > Yes, the validator should be able to catch such situations. Just how? > It doesn't right now. I see some possible approaches: > * warn user if tagging excessively long ways with "layer". Here the problem > is to judge what is excessively long.
As judgement is difficult and it will still depend on other cases, I do not think this will help that much > * warn user if applying layer to a way that exceeds the size of downloaded > area > because in this situation the validator is unable to do even the basic > checks. even though this will lead to false warnings when working with incomplete data, I would give this solution a try. > * warn user if applying layer to a way without tunnel/bridge/covered/indoor or > similar tags. Covered is an example where it does not work e.g. you tag the building=roof with layer and not the way underneath. Still for other tags (bridge/tunnel etc) this would be helpful. > There is more than just JOSM and all should follow the same rules so ideally > this rules would be nicely documented in the wiki. +1 Note, JOSM would almost be able to use the list right now, already. >>> What kind of underground areas are that in Kansas, do you have a pointer? >> >> I'm not exactly sure where exactly it is, but there's apparently a pretty >> extensive underground industrial and office district entirely underground >> complete with drivable underground streets in KCK thanks to repurposing an >> old mine. > > interesting, I will have a look when I have some time. Could you post a link, please. I wonder how mapnik will work with that as there are already problems with a single underground floor/parking.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
