[Patch] Warn non-experts when combining ways with conflicting tags or ways being part of relations

[simon04]

To reduce erroneous edits, I suggest to warn non-experts when combining ways with conflicting tags or ways being part of relations. The aim is to minimize broken route relations or highways being tunnel/brigde for several kilometers at the same time.

For non-experts, show the dialog 1 (if needed), show the dialog 2 (if needed), show the CombinePrimitiveResolverDialog (if needed).

1. 

2. 

[simon04]

Patch attached … This comes with some cleanup of the CombinePrimitiveResolverDialog code which was replicated at least 3 times in the core.

What do you think? I'm happy to hear some comments. :-)

[skyper]

Replying to simon04:

What do you think? I'm happy to hear some comments. :-)

For tags, I think it is smoother to show this dialog after the "tag conflict dialog" with a button to go back to the "tag conflict dialog".

[simon04]

Replying to skyper:

For tags, I think it is smoother to show this dialog after the "tag conflict dialog" with a button to go back to the "tag conflict dialog".

The "new" dialog is intended to somehow explain the situation (why another dialog is going to appear) and the dangers (may lead to unwanted results). If the user chooses to abort, the tag conflict dialog does not need to be shown at all. Therefore, I would show the new dialog before showing a more complicated tag conflict dialog.

[simon04]

In 5132/josm:

fix #7513 - Warn non-experts when combining ways with conflicting tags or ways being part of relations

[simon04]

From comment:11:ticket:4842

Now it raises conflicts even with untagged objects.

I have an node with addr:housenumber=19 as tag and part of a associatedStreet relation and merge it with a node id:0 with no tages but part of a closed way and I get the tag conflict dialogue shown.

[simon04]

attachment:7513_bugfix.patch​​ restores original behaviour (i.e., before r5132). However, the original implementation seems to be a quirk to me: When merging nodes, the conflict dialog is skipped when the nodes are part of at most 1 relation. Why is it safe up to one relation, but no longer when 2 or more relations are involved?

[skyper]

Replying to simon04:

attachment:7513_bugfix.patch​​ restores original behaviour (i.e., before r5132). However, the original implementation seems to be a quirk to me: When merging nodes, the conflict dialog is skipped when the nodes are part of at most 1 relation. Why is it safe up to one relation, but no longer when 2 or more relations are involved?

Can not think of any problem as long as one node does not have any tags nor memberships. Concerning ways I am not sure as you could easily break relations that way.

[stoecker]

Hmm. What is the status of this? Apply it or not?

[stoecker]

@simon04: Status?

[simon04]

Actually, I forgot this ticket and the idea in the patch. We could still apply it … ;-)

[skyper]

Replying to simon04:

From skyper comment:11:ticket:4842

Now it raises conflicts even with untagged objects.

I have an node with addr:housenumber=19 as tag and part of a associatedStreet relation and merge it with a node id:0 with no tags but part of a closed way and I get the tag conflict dialogue shown.

Can not reproduce. Works as expected.

Replying to simon04:

attachment:7513_bugfix.patch​​ restores original behaviour (i.e., before r5132). However, the original implementation seems to be a quirk to me: When merging nodes, the conflict dialog is skipped when the nodes are part of at most 1 relation. Why is it safe up to one relation, but no longer when 2 or more relations are involved?

Was this revert ever applied ?
Think we can close this ticket.

[skyper]

Forgot about normal mode only:

Replying to skyper:

From skyper comment:11:ticket:4842

Now it raises conflicts even with untagged objects.

I have an node with addr:housenumber=19 as tag and part of a associatedStreet relation and merge it with a node id:0 with no tags but part of a closed way and I get the tag conflict dialogue shown.

Can not reproduce. Works as expected.

Can reproduce:

Relative:URL: ^/trunk
Repository:UUID: 0c6e7542-c601-0410-84e7-c038aed88b3b
Last:Changed Date: 2020-01-22 22:31:24 +0100 (Wed, 22 Jan 2020)
Revision:15752
Build-Date:2020-01-23 02:30:55
URL:https://josm.openstreetmap.de/svn/trunk

Was this revert ever applied ?

No was not.

Think we can close this ticket.

[skyper]

Would it be possible to optionally enable this for expert user, too ?

As we also have conflicting tag combinations and actions like "Join Areas" (#18675) it would be useful. It could still be disabled like some other warnings with options to remember for action, session, e.g.