[OSM-talk-be] Fwd: [osmose-backend] Missing Parent Tag for all highways with bicycle = yes (#1)

[Frédéric Rodrigo]

Hi,

Black list on route=bicycle if now effective.
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/

I'm still open to report on osmose analyser probleme.

Frédéric.


Le 25/03/2013 17:55, André Pirard a écrit :
> On 2013-03-24 18:32, Frédéric Rodrigo wrote :
>> > It makes no sense.
>> > route=bicycle is a tag for a relation, not for a way.
>> > It's very surprising that Osmose commands to repeat such a tag on
>> > ever cycling way !!!
>> > How could we identify a cycling route if all the cycling ways
>> > contained route=bicycle ????????
>>
>> > Osmose seems to be "rather stupid", and decides that if x number of
>> > objects has certain tag combinations, all objects that have one of
>> > the tags, should also have the others. It does not verify if the tag
>> > is appropriate for the object (node, way, relation). But it is still
>> > a valuable tool.
>>
>> It's an automatic analysis based on statistical and an arbitrary
>> trigger at 50 count. I can change the tigger, eg with relative value.
>>
>> Error was triggered with a "parent" tag like in highway=construction
>> and construction=primary.
>>
>> The analysis have already a tag blacklist. I can add route=bicycle.
>>
>> > These tags were used on some ways for some routes: if a route goes
>> > over a big square, an additional way is created going across the
>> > square.
>>
>> Really need tag on this ways ? Or add the area to route relation, or
>> just no way at all.
>>
>> > and I guess osmose wouldn't like untagged ways either
>>
>> Osmose report error on untagged way not part of relation (with role).
>>
>> > But I haven't found any ways with both route=bicycle and bicycle=yes
>> > though.
>>
>> I found lot of them here :
>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/?Q=way(%7B%7Bbbox%7D%7D)%5B%22route%22%3D%22bicycle%22%5D%5B%22bicycle%22%3D%22yes%22%5D%3B(._%3B%3E%3B)%3Bout%20meta%3B%0A&C=50.67634;4.60636;12&R
>>
>
>
> Frédéric, my text you quote above has been replaced by this:
>>> I completely change my mind.
>>> route= on a way can be ambiguous (in case of multiple routes knowing
>>> and where they go at junctions) and the better place for it is in a
>>> relation, in which case it's optional and not very useful on the way.
>>> *But it is not invalid and there's no compelling reason to remove them.**
>>> * *
>>> **What is incredibly surprising is that Osmose commands to add route=
>>> on ways where there is no route.**
>>> **Osmose should remove those warning urgently.*
>
>> There is some choses:
>> - change the data
>> - black list route=bicycle
>> - use relative value on analyser to trigger at higher count.
>
> You should obviously blacklist asap.
> But you should also refrain from using statistical methods to invent non
> existing OSM rules.
>
> Cheers,
>
> André.
>
>
>
>
>
>