(patch needs rework) two more select modes

[anonymous]

For myself I've implemented two enhancements in JOSM which I like to share if they look reasonable to you.
First ist selecting connected objects via double click. I've done this mainly for buildings to be able to quickly select a whole block and move/turn it. The problem is the question how far you wanna take the term connected. Applied to streets that can go as far as selecting all ways in your layer. Because of this I added a maximum depth about whose default one might argue (hard coded to 10).

Second it selecting a closed way by pressing Alt and clicking somewhere into the area (or Alt+Shift for adding it to the selection). This often makes it a lot easier selecting a bunch of single buildings.
Maybe my implementation is naive because I don't know much about geometric calculations. But thought I was worried about efficiency I never experienced problems on my not fast machine in the last six months.

[anonymous]

patch against stable version implementing both actions

[bastiK]

First part:

Selecting a block of buildings is a common task, so this looks quite useful to me.

But i'm not so happy with the integration: The double click would be another feature that isn't obvious at first, so either you get it by playing around or someone tells you or you read it in the documentation. (Last is least likely :) )

Why not put it in the edit menu? I can also imagine a "1 step" version of it. If you remember the shortcut, you could extend the selection as far as you need.

Second part:

Haven't tried your patch yet, but sounds good to me. To be consistent with the usual selection, Ctrl+Alt+click should toggle selection. Regarding pointInPoly: This is also provided by Java class lib (GeneralPath.contains).

Usually there are multiple areas on top of each other. How do you handle this?

[anonymous]

Replying to bastiK:

But i'm not so happy with the integration: The double click would be another feature that isn't obvious at first, so either you get it by playing around or someone tells you or you read it in the documentation. (Last is least likely :) )

Why not put it in the edit menu? I can also imagine a "1 step" version of it. If you remember the shortcut, you could extend the selection as far as you need.

You can extend the selection by double clicking and holding shift as I think one would expect.
What do you mean with putting it in the edit menu? I don't know how this could be done via a shortcut and all modifier keys are assigned already. Or do you think of another mode like select, add, zoom, extrude?

Second part:

Haven't tried your patch yet, but sounds good to me. To be consistent with the usual selection, Ctrl+Alt+click should toggle selection.

True, I think that could be done.

Regarding pointInPoly: This is also provided by Java class lib (GeneralPath.contains).

And converting each way to be tested into a GeneralPath (or Patch2D respectivly) on the fly over and over again? I'm all for reusing, but at this cost?

Usually there are multiple areas on top of each other. How do you handle this?

There are two scenarios. First you have areas each fully contained in another. In this case only the innermost (tightest) is selected. If multiple areas just partly overlap, I lack criteria on which one is better, e.g. which one the user meant and select them all.

One thing I forgot to add is that there is a bug in how I select the closed ways because after selecting I need to click twice in an empty area to deselect. I couldn't find the reason so far.

[cmuelle8]

hi,

sorry to snap in, but please consider that ALT modifier is already used to toggle multiple way segments running over identical nodes. as far as i am concerned we can make this the default behavior (as to free the ALT modifier), but current consent with the JOSM maintainers is to activate the toggle feature with ALT..

apart from this i like the idea of selecting connected primitives and also basti's suggestion to have it in a gradually increasing step-by-step (err dblclick-by-dblclick) fashion.

greetings

[stoecker]

Any progress here?

[akks]

Will try to include the functionality and ideas of code while implementing #6168.