[josm-dev] validator question, multipolygons

[Frederik Ramm]

Dirk,

Dirk Stöcker wrote:
> Maybe the code has bugs, but simply saying that I made a lot of crap is 
> not the way to go. And yes I take that one a bit personal, as it is 
> basically my code.

I wasn't aware of this, I thought it had been done by someone else. I 
have, however, often been asked "why does the validator complain about 
X" and my only answer was "probably it's over-eager... AGAIN".

So maybe you have taken off a lot of it's edge in the last months (and 
you are right, I haven't followed recent developments, I wasn't even 
aware that you were actively developing validator code), and maybe these 
situations have been fixed meanwhile, but certainly more than once in 
the past I have cursed validator for giving people all the wrong ideas 
and in fact introducing a streamlined kind of mapping which has never 
been OSM style.

> So before blaming all and everything 
> start to get more in touch with the recent code base and when necessary 
> file bug reports where fine tuning is needed.

In my eyes the validator does not have a problem with one specific 
check; it has an attitude problem. Until now I wasn't aware that it was 
*your* attitude I was criticizing when I said so ;) but I think the 
validator is nannying people too much, *especially* (and I checked that 
before writing it) since it is enabled by default on a new install.

I don't even have to look past the warning dialog for my first 
complaint: Even if the list contains only "warnings", the dialog title 
still reads: "Data has errors." - That's what I mean by attitude 
problem; in my eyes it is totally wrong to *ever* tell a mapper that his 
"data has errors". The validator can at most point out potential 
problems - but "data has errors"? As an expericed mapper I percieve that 
to be arrogance on JOSM's part, and as a newbie mapper I would certainly 
not proceed with uploading.

I'll give some examples for checks that I think are nannying too much, 
all these are active by default:

* "untagged way" (warning) - perfectly ok if such a way is a relation 
member. You're not showing the warning if it is a multipolygon but there 
may be others you don't know of.
* "unknown relation type" (warning) - JOSM should never assume to be in 
possession of a full list of allowed relation types!
* "unnamed ways" (warning) - I think it is perfectly normal to draw 
streets from aerial imagery and have no name for them.
* "illegal tag/value combinations" - someone seems to have had a field 
day here. 90% of these deserve to be thrown out. Only recently it 
complained about my "man_made=pipeline" - from reading the source I 
found out that it was expecting an extra tag with details about the 
pipeline.

To understand the severity of this, take this example: You are new to 
JOSM. You map a road and tag it highway=road. You hit upload. You get 
(emphasis by me):

Data WITH ERRORS. Upload anyway?
+ Warnings
   + ILLEGAL tag/value combinations - temporary highway type

So, highway=road is an error, and an illegal combination of a tag and 
value? Thankfully it doesn't complain when I write highway=raod. Maybe I 
should use highway=raod instead of highway=road as the latter is clearly 
illegal and an error.

I think the main problem is that the validator is now by default enabled 
before download - something you can switch off, of course, but to the 
new mapper the "Your data has errors" message conveys: We don't want 
your data, please stop what you're doing!

It is funny that both of us seem to have a desire to nanny JOSM users, 
just whenever you're doing it I complain and vice versa.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"