Possible wrong warning in route=bicycle

[naoliv]

Validate the attached example and see a warning about lcn without highway
From what I understand, there is no need (nor it will be right) to have a highway in the relation (since we already have the highways defined in the ways; also, we could have different highway types defining this route)

JOSM:

Build-Date:2016-10-29 14:02:24
Revision:11186
Is-Local-Build:true

Identification: JOSM/1.5 (11186 SVN pt_BR) Linux Debian GNU/Linux unstable (sid)
Memory Usage: 798 MB / 4029 MB (147 MB allocated, but free)
Java version: 1.8.0_111-8u111-b14-2-b14, Oracle Corporation, OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM
Screen: :0.0 1920x1080
Maximum Screen Size: 1920x1080
Java package: openjdk-8-jre:amd64-8u111-b14-2
Java ATK Wrapper package: libatk-wrapper-java:all-0.33.3-9
VM arguments: [-Dawt.useSystemAAFontSettings=on]
Dataset consistency test: No problems found

[Klumbumbus]

According to my feelings and ​https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycle_routes#Tagging_cycle_route_networks routes are tagged nowadays with network=icn/ncn/rcn/lcn at the relation instead of with icn=yes, ncn=yes, rcn=yes, lcn=yes at all the member highways, right?

[naoliv]

Will you convert icn|ncn|rcn|lcn into network=* in the relations?
Something like this?

If there is no network, convert
If there are both tags and they are the same, remove icn|ncn|rcn|lcn
If there are both and they diverge, issue a warning

[Klumbumbus]

A way can belong to different route relations and different ways with different icn|ncn|rcn|lcn can belong to one or more route relations. So this requires manual transformation.

Anyway it is not really called deprecated in the wiki, so we should wait until the situation is more clear about the tagging. For now I'll remove the "lcn without highway" warning which is in fact false positive for your example (and to not promote this tag).

[naoliv]

Replying to Klumbumbus:

A way can belong to different route relations and different ways with different icn|ncn|rcn|lcn can belong to one or more route relations. So this requires manual transformation.

Not on the ways, but on the relation itself.
This example that I sent here was based on some wrong routes that I saw (they had lcn=yes in the route relation and not on the ways)

So comment:3 will actually be:

"When there is a relation with icn|ncn|rcn|lcn, should it be automatically converted?"

[Klumbumbus]

OK, I missunderstood. Well I think we should wait for a more clear statement in the wiki. Maybe you want to create a proposal "deprecate lcn/... in favor of network" ? :)

[Klumbumbus]

In 11209/josm:

fix #13875 - remove "lcn without highway" warning

[Klumbumbus]

Once the tagging situation and the wiki is more clear please create a new ticket. Then we can add a deprecated warning for lcn and its siblings.