[josm-dev] validator question, multipolygons

[Ulf Lamping]

Am 05.03.2011 11:51, schrieb Dirk Stöcker:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
>> 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 asked some non-development users now and it seems there is an
> understanding problem between the way developers and users view the
> reports. I'm used to error, warning and info methods from a lot of
> development tools like compilers. But it seems most users don't
> understand a warning the same way. So probably we should find a better
> way to explain this situation.

Yes, rethinking the "wording" of the message types and the messages 
might be a very good idea.

E.g. "unknown relation type" (warning): If JOSM has no basis to judge if 
something is right or wrong, this is no good basis to issue a warning, 
this is certainly better an info like: "Sorry, I don't know the relation 
type XY".
A different story would be a checker for obvious spelling mistakes: 
"Warning: The relation type rout should probably be route" - and even 
that should be cautiously done.

Regards, ULFL

P.S: I'm always fixing compiler warnings to avoid later problems, but 
I've switched off the validator some time ago, as it was only a hassle 
and no real help for me.