[josm-dev] JOSM rendering improvements the last days - I'm guilty!

[Ulf Lamping]

Dirk Stöcker schrieb:
> On Mon, 4 Aug 2008, Ulf Lamping wrote:
> 
>>> Ok. Now two new options exist:
>>> a) replace k= by b= to make a boolean test (like also done e.g. in preset
>>> tester and other places).
>>> b) remove k= and b= totally to test against existence of the key.
>>>
>>> I changed the first part of the styles/standard/elemstyles.xml to
>>> introduce this new features, but left the remaining parts unmodified (I
>>> don't want to break anything :-)
>>>
>>>
>> a) You mean replace v by b, right? That would be the way to go IMHO.
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> b) You mean remove k and v totally, right? I don't like that thing, as
>> the existance of the key and if it's yes, true, 1, ... is really a
>> different thing.
> 
> Yes. It is. That's why I implemented both :)
> 
> When you replace v by b, you do a boolean test (means essentially all 
> boolean type values are handled as "yes" or "no". Non-boolean values are 
> handled as they are -- thus ... k="highway" b="secondary" ... would work 
> also (as secondary is not boolean), but this is only a side effect and 
> should not be used.
> 
> When you remove v or b totally, you test for existence of a key. This will 
> be useful in seldom cases (I found one -- oneway attribute for nodes :-)
> 
Ah, missunderstanding on my side. I thought you meant to *replace* the 
former way, and you thought about *adding* it - which makes sense at 
least for oneway on nodes ;-)

However, I'm unsure if b) will be used often and this functionality 
makes reading the rules at least a bit more complicated.

Anyway, if it's done already I just don't mind :-)

Regards, ULFL