[josm-dev] Unclosed ways

[Dirk Stöcker]

On Mon, 14 Jul 2008, Karl Newman wrote:

>>> Well, for sure the checks will produce false positives. That is always a
>>> balance between false positives and false negatives (i.e. not reported
>>> problems).
>>
>> However, having a number of false positives can clutter up the list of
>> problems and make the whole process ineffective.
>>
>> How about having a tag like "note=IGNORE <test>" to tell the validator
>> to ignore a specific false positive?
>
> That's a nice idea, sort of in line with the @SuppressWarnings annotation in
> Java but I think it should get its own key ("validator_ignore"="no_name;
> overlapping_ways") instead of overloading the note key. It could be used for
> all the validators.

Well, you mix up two problems. Disabling a specific test is already 
possible: Uncheck it in prefs.

The second is more individual: Ignore certain false positives. That would 
be more like:
- select the warning
- review it
- is false positive?
   - mark it as false positive (based on warning type and related elements)
   - save the false positive list
   - on next check no longer display this warning

Who implements this? :-)

Ciao
-- 
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)