JOSM displays wrong data

[wonk]

Hi! I have a strange error in the OSM-Data shown by JOSM. Another user told me, it's a JOSM-error. The error occurs in the line-relation of a bus-route-relation. The bus-route-relation ist ok (No 1.021.106 for example), but the entry for the parent-relation is "Freileitung (Starkstrom)", which means a wrong name. The parent-relation is okay too(1.026.689), the wrong name is only shown in the JOSM-display. The correct name is "Bus 40".
It was not possible, to load the parent-relation of the line-relation (network "AVV").

wonk

[ajoessen]

The error is caused by the type=line tag for the relation 1026689.
This tag is according to the oxomoa-Scheme used for public transport in Germany.

For power lines, relations with a tag type=route route=power or route=power is common. So no conflict with power lines mapping, but a translation error.

Ajoessen

[bastiK]

(In [3389]) fixed #5228 - type=line (bus-)relation is translated to "Freileitung (Starkstrom)" (power line)

[stoecker]

Whereas the first fix is ok, the "trc("Relation type", relation.get("type"))" effectively disables the whole tranlsation, as relation types are nowhere translated explicitely.

[bastiK]

I added it to i18n/specialmessages.java. This should work, right?

[stoecker]

Well, but only for hand translated messages. The idea was to use our string pool for "automatic translation". Probably best is to use context translation first and try context-less afterwards. So we use our pool, but also can add better translations for known types.

[bastiK]

I would prefer explicit translations for each relation type, but your suggestion is acceptable.

[bastiK]

Note that adding a type to i18n/specialmessages.java would not invalidate the default translation from the pool. In some languages, the "Relation type"-context translation may be available and in others not. You would have to add a context for the pool translation, as well (like I did for "line").

[bastiK]

PPS: When a strange relation type is translated by chance, the user might get the impression, it is known to the editor, or JOSM has validated the relation and blesses it.

[anonymous]

We could fix that, when we add translation texts for all common relation types.

[stoecker]

Last was me :-)

[bastiK]

Sorry, I don't really understand your message. :)

[stoecker]

When all types are properly translated, we don't need a heuristic translation. So instead of code fixing adding missing types is also a option.

[bastiK]

I vote for that option ;). Can we close this thread, then?