Opened 14 years ago
Closed 4 years ago
#6166 closed defect (fixed)
Relation-Editor: sorting of routes does not work properly if both ends are dual-carriageways.
| Reported by: | skyper | Owned by: | team |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | Core | Version: | latest |
| Keywords: | sort, relation, route, relation-sorting, dual-way connectivity | Cc: |
Description (last modified by )
I have a route-relation which ends on both sides as dual-carriageway.
I attach an example file
See you skyper
Attachments (2)
Change History (16)
by , 14 years ago
| Attachment: | relation_example.osm added |
|---|
comment:1 by , 13 years ago
Agree with this. A workaround is to make sure the bottom is sorted, then reverse all and do the same.
comment:3 by , 6 years ago
| Description: | modified (diff) |
|---|---|
| Keywords: | public-transport-v1 relation-sorting added |
comment:4 by , 5 years ago
Still a problem
Relative:URL: ^/trunk Repository:UUID: 0c6e7542-c601-0410-84e7-c038aed88b3b Last:Changed Date: 2020-04-06 02:17:07 +0200 (Mon, 06 Apr 2020) Revision:16239 Build-Date:2020-04-06 00:18:43 URL:https://josm.openstreetmap.de/svn/trunk
comment:5 by , 5 years ago
| Keywords: | route dual-way added; public-transport-v1 removed |
|---|
comment:6 by , 4 years ago
| Keywords: | connectivity added |
|---|
comment:7 by , 4 years ago
I submitted a potential fix at https://github.com/openstreetmap/josm/pull/61.
comment:8 by , 4 years ago
The patch was committed but I am not sure if it works 100% on the top of the list.
follow-up: 10 comment:9 by , 4 years ago
@skyper, the patch was commited 5 months ago, right? Or are you referring to a more recent change?
Also, have you seen a case where this does not work properly yet? Could you provide an example file, or describe a case where it does not work properly?
comment:10 by , 4 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → needinfo |
Hi Matthijs, nice to read some word from you.
I just stumbled over this ticket and was wondering, if I can close it.
Replying to Matthijs Kooijman <matthijs@…>:
@skyper, the patch was commited 5 months ago, right? Or are you referring to a more recent change?
Yes five months, r16886 in #19633.
Also, have you seen a case where this does not work properly yet? Could you provide an example file, or describe a case where it does not work properly?
Yes, I will. I think I have an example but I have to verify, if the displayed connectivity or the sorting itself is the problem. Thought I had reported it a long time ago. Give me some hours/days, please.
by , 4 years ago
| Attachment: | route_with_dual_carriage_on_several_end.osm.xz added |
|---|
example with several open end
comment:11 by , 4 years ago
Wow, sorting does work nicely, even with several gaps (minor road with several parts and open ends in many situations). Thanks.
Only minor issue is that it never stops, in my case, instead all members are flipped without any improvement. New ticket?
The problem is the connectivity which does not work on the start if at least one branch consists of only one way.
Find attached example file for both issues.
comment:12 by , 4 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Status: | needinfo → new |
comment:13 by , 4 years ago
comment:14 by , 4 years ago
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
I agree that this is indeed fixed now, especially with the new tickets you created for the related issues, so I'm going to close this.
I'm not sure what the policy for milestones and releases is (seems milestones are just month numbers, there are no actual semantically versioned tags or so I think, but the only milestones I can select are in the future), so I'll just ignore that here.
I probably won't have any time or reason to look at the new issues in the near future, btw. Maybe if I'm working to update some routes again such issues annoy me and I'll dive into the source again, but too many other things going on right now :-p
example file