When splitting a way, that is member of a turn restriction, the part that is not connected to the via-node is still part of the relation

[Torstiko]

When splitting a way, that is member of a turn restriction, the part that is not connected to the via-node is still part of the relation.

Wenn man einen Weg, der Teil einer Abbiegevorschrift ist (zb restriction:only_straight_on) teilt, so ist das Teilstück, das nicht mit dem via-node verbunden ist immernoch Teil der Relation. Das macht keinen Sinn. Zwar kommt eine Meldung, dass man Relationen und Mitglieder überprüfen soll, jedoch lässt jemand unwissendes meist die Finger davon, womit es dann 2 "from" oder "to" Mitglieder gibt.

[anonymous]

As long as we have no specific relation handling this is a wontfix. We can add some workarounds now, but I would prefer to have a generic system.

[ulfl]

Ticket #2764 has been marked as a duplicate of this ticket.

[plaicy]

Ticket #2790 has been marked as a duplicate of this ticket.

[fidoez]

With the redesign of the relation editor and the increasing importance of relations it could be worth to increase the priority of this ticket.

[fidoez]

19. also #3507

[stoecker]

Ticket #3507 has been marked as a duplicate of this ticket.

[AM909]

I'm taking great care to survey and map turn restrictions in my area. Unfortunately, the more restrictions I create in the area, the harder it is to create new ones, since splitting a way now often results in broken restrictions. I can't even find an easy workaround, other than to write down all the id numbers before hand so I know which ones to fix. This multiplies the time taken to map a single restriction (which is still not ideal) by many times.

This seems to me a simple fix - do not copy to or from relations where type=restriction when splitting a way.

[stoecker]

(In [2628]) close #2086 - handle restriction relation for way splitting

[stoecker]

It was no simple fix, as you need to find out which of the splitted ways needs to get the role.