check for invalid "layer" tagging on tunnel=* and bridge=*

[mdk]

I found several wrong taggings for tunnel=* and bridge=*. For example I found lots of tunnel=* without layer=-1, but instead with ele=-1, level=-1 or width=-1. Theoretically also -2, -3 and so on, but I only saw -1. The same with bridge=*, but positive numbers. Sometimes the are also fixes by adding the missing layer=* tag, but leaving the other ones. In my opinion negative width values are always a failure. Only positive width values on highway=* and waterway=* could be valid.

It would be nice, if the validator would warn about ways with

• waterway=*, tunnel=* level=-1
• waterway=*, tunnel=* ele=-1
• waterway=*, tunnel=* width=-1
• highway=*, bridge=* level=1
• highway=*, bridge=* ele=1

and offer correction to layer=*

[Klumbumbus]

Could you give numbers how often these cases appear in the database?

[naoliv]

[waterway][tunnel][level] = 3095 ways (2992 without layer)
It seems that level is always wrong here (having layer or not)

[waterway][tunnel][ele] = 187 ways (91 with ele = -1)
I think that it also doesn't make sense to have ele in waterways

For width = -1 JOSM already detects and warns about the invalid negative value.

[highway][bridge][level] = 6956 ways
Randomly picked some and they all should be layer instead.

[highway][bridge][ele] = 1014 ways
Random picks also seemed wrong usage of ele

[mdk]

At lest a check for negative width should be clear. Actually I get the more unspecific warning:
"unusual value of width: meters is default: point is decimal separator: if units, put space than unit"

[skyper]

Replying to naoliv:

[waterway][tunnel][level] = 3095 ways (2992 without layer)
It seems that level is always wrong here (having layer or not)

A culvert in a building might have both level and layer with different values.

[waterway][tunnel][ele] = 187 ways (91 with ele = -1)
I think that it also doesn't make sense to have ele in waterways

Why not? Think about a culvert below sea level.

[highway][bridge][level] = 6956 ways
Randomly picked some and they all should be layer instead.

Mmh, complex bridges have both layer and level which do not need to have the same value.

[highway][bridge][ele] = 1014 ways
Random picks also seemed wrong usage of ele

But it is not wrong to tag a bridge with ele.

All examples usually need a layer tag, that is the warning I expect. Everything else is only informal.

[skyper]

Replying to mdk:

At lest a check for negative width should be clear. Actually I get the more unspecific warning:
"unusual value of width: meters is default: point is decimal separator: if units, put space than unit"

I guess most of the tags with units could benefit from a better warning for negative values. Please open a new ticket.

Replying to skyper:

All examples usually need a layer tag, that is the warning I expect. Everything else is only informal.

Is it correct, that we can expect a layer=* with tunnel=* or bridge=* in general? Value no and tunnel=building_passage are exceptions. Anything else?

[mdk]

The problem with a better check for negative values is addressed in #21026.

[Klumbumbus]

In 17934/josm:

Fix #21026, see #14532 - Better warnings for negative numeric values

[Klumbumbus]

In 17938/josm:

See #21026, see #14532 - Fix unit test

[Klumbumbus]

In 17939/josm:

See #21026, see #14532 - Fix unit test

[skyper]

Replying to skyper:

Replying to skyper:

All examples usually need a layer tag, that is the warning I expect. Everything else is only informal.

Is it correct, that we can expect a layer=* with tunnel=* or bridge=* in general? Value no and tunnel=building_passage are exceptions. Anything else?

See #9819.

[Klumbumbus]

In 17955/josm:

see #21026, see #14532 - Fix i18n