Modify

Opened 5 years ago

Last modified 22 months ago

#18014 new enhancement

Validator marks no_entry and no_exit-restrictions as an error

Reported by: Peilscheibe Owned by: team
Priority: normal Milestone:
Component: Core validator Version:
Keywords: no_exit no_entry restriction Cc: Peilscheibe

Description

There are the well documented restriction relations "no_entry" and "no_exit" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:restriction) which are allowing

  • one or more "from"-members for a no_entry-restriction
  • one or more "to"-members for a no_exit-restriction

However the JOSM-validator is recognizing such relations as an error.

Please update the validation rules accordingly so these relation types are accepted with the valid member numbers as described.
The mentioned restriction types started to be documented somewhen in 2012 and I'm not aware of any issues with them as the definitions are pretty straightforward.

Thanks

Attachments (0)

Change History (7)

comment:1 by Don-vip, 5 years ago

They are not used much (682 and 254 times).

comment:2 by skyper, 2 years ago

Not sure which warning this is about but a least part of it needs to be solved in presets, see #20833.

comment:3 by GerdP, 2 years ago

A no-entry relation allows multiple from-ways, the no_exit relation allows multiple to-ways. That's the major difference to the other turn restrictions. JOSM doesn't allow multiple from- or to-ways.

Last edited 2 years ago by GerdP (previous) (diff)

in reply to:  3 comment:4 by skyper, 2 years ago

Replying to GerdP:

A no-entry relation allows multiple from-ways, the no_exit relation allows multiple to-ways. That's the major difference to the other turn restrictions. JOSM doesn't allow multiple from- or to-ways.

Yes, that is why we need own presets with correct definition of the roles, #20833.

comment:5 by Neuwessi11, 2 years ago

I want to support any people who are missing the no_entry-support by JOSM.
I think it doesn't matter if it is often used or not, because there are enough situations, where this restriction is the best way of tagging.

And did you ever contemplate that it would may be have a significant higher number of usage if JOSM would not mark it as an error?

comment:6 by GerdP, 2 years ago

See also #17057

comment:7 by taylor.smock, 22 months ago

Ticket #22042 has been marked as a duplicate of this ticket.

Modify Ticket

Change Properties
Set your email in Preferences
Action
as new The owner will remain team.
as The resolution will be set. Next status will be 'closed'.
to The owner will be changed from team to the specified user.
Next status will be 'needinfo'. The owner will be changed from team to Peilscheibe.
as duplicate The resolution will be set to duplicate. Next status will be 'closed'. The specified ticket will be cross-referenced with this ticket.
The owner will be changed from team to anonymous. Next status will be 'assigned'.

Add Comment


E-mail address and name can be saved in the Preferences .
 
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.