Add building attached to road as a validation warning

[awiseman]

I've often seen buildings (or other features) attached to roads, I believe because of snapping in iD and JOSM. Can we add that as a validation warning? I think in the vast majority of cases it will be incorrect, except for places where roads go through or under buildings.

[anonymous]

changing to validator

[anonymous]

anybody?

[Klumbumbus]

In 11736/josm:

fix #14395 - Add building attached to road as a validation warning

[Klumbumbus]

I hope this doesn't produce false positives.

[naoliv]

I do this in a more generic way in my local rules:

way[highway] > node { set .is_in_highway; }

area[!highway] > node.is_in_highway {
        throwWarning: tr("area connected to highway");
}

ie, it doesn't matter the type of area (landuse, leisure, building, etc)

But for a proper solution it needs #11523/#10215

[naoliv]

With the attached example1 you should see the problem: it detects 3 connected nodes (instead the way/area).
With example2 there is one problem in testing for first_last_node: it doesn't detect when the first/last node is connected to the highway.

If detecting all connected nodes is acceptable, maybe the test for first_last_node should be removed?

[Klumbumbus]

Replying to naoliv:

way[highway] > node { set .is_in_highway; }

area[!highway] > node.is_in_highway {
        throwWarning: tr("area connected to highway");
}

This code produces false positives for

• building passages, fuel station, car wash,... (e.g. ​#map=19/50.71033/12.86643)
• highways mapped as area (e.g. ​way/209763090)

Both cases are very common.

[Klumbumbus]

In 12089/josm:

see #14395 - avoid false positive connection warning with building=no