#12386 closed enhancement (fixed)
Power validation rules update
Reported by: | francois.lacombe | Owned by: | team |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 16.02 |
Component: | Core validator | Version: | tested |
Keywords: | power, presets, validation | Cc: |
Description (last modified by )
Hi,
Due to recently power presets update, this ticket aims to provide updated guidelines regarding the validation of user inputs with these keys.
This comes after some objects have been broken by non-knowledgable users (substation on open poly-line, power terminal in the middle of a power way and so on...)
Here are the valid features associated with the main power keys, got from the up to date wiki
Tag (wiki) | Valid features | Preset | object type validator rule |
---|---|---|---|
Tag:power=plant | area, relation | ✔ | ✔ |
Tag:power=generator | node, area | ✔ | not needed |
Tag:power=cable | way | ✔ | not needed |
Tag:power=line | way | ✔ | ✔ Done. |
Tag:power=minor_line | way | ✔ | not needed |
Tag:power=tower | node | ✔ | ✔ Done.(for unclosed ways only) |
Tag:power=pole | node | ✔ | ✔ |
Tag:power=terminal | node | Not in Preset, see #12297 | - |
Tag:power=portal | node, way | ✔ | not needed |
Tag:power=insulator | node, way | ✔ | not needed |
Tag:power=catenary_mast | node | Not in Preset, see #12297 | - |
Tag:power=transformer | node | ✔ Done. | ✔ Done. |
Tag:power=switch or Tag:power=pole+switch=yes or Tag:power=tower+switch=yes | node | ✔ | not needed |
Tag:power=substation | node, area | ✔ | not needed (area style not closed warning for unclosed ways already there) |
Tag:power=converter | node, area | ✔ | not needed (area style not closed warning for unclosed ways already there) |
Tag:power=compensator | node, area | ✔ | not needed (area style not closed warning for unclosed ways already there) |
Tag:power=insulator | node, way | ✔ Done. | not needed |
Tag:building=transformer_tower | node, area | ✔ | not needed (area style not closed warning for unclosed ways already there) |
Presets may be updated according to this table and I suggest to prompt a validation warning when such keys are used on different features than the given ones.
It may be great to update current validation rules :
Rule | Update | Progress |
---|---|---|
A power support is missing on a power line/power minor_line | Add Tag:power=portal, Tag:power=terminal, Tag:power=insulator as valid supports. Furthermore, a power line/minor_line can be directly connected to a Tag:power=transformer. | ✔ Done. |
And add a few more :
Rule | Description | Progress |
---|---|---|
A Tag:power=cable without Key:location | A power cable is a feature which must be set in a dedicated location such as indoor, underground or undersea (non exhaustive list). Any power cable object without the location key may show up a validation warning. | ✔ Done. Wiki says that location=* is optional and that underground is the assumed default value for power=cable. However 5290 out of 7963 cables have the location tag (http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/dMQ). So add this as info level. |
Crossing between road, railroad, path, landuse, waterways and power ways | Power lines may be long objects crossing through country and mappers can easily place nodes in common with roads or landuse areas. A validation error should be prompted to reduce the amount of such problems. | |
Missing voltage as important information | Adding Key:voltage to Tag:power=line, Tag:power=minor_line, Tag:power=cable, Tag:power=generator, Tag:power=transformer or Tag:power=plant is a really useful information and miss this key should prompt an info validation message. Voltage is currently one main threshold to distinguish line from minor_line. | ✔ Done. |
These lists can be improved according to the experience of contributors and developers
Attachments (0)
Change History (27)
comment:1 by , 9 years ago
Milestone: | → 16.02 |
---|
comment:2 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:3 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:4 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:5 by , 9 years ago
comment:6 by , 9 years ago
We don't need validator rules for cases, which are nearly non existent in the database. This would only extend the validation time without a gain.
comment:7 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:8 by , 9 years ago
Component: | Core → Core validator |
---|
comment:9 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:10 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:12 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
follow-up: 16 comment:13 by , 9 years ago
Thank you Klumbumbus for the edits so far
Regarding power=transformer on ways/areas : mappers really shouldn't use this.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dtransformer
The 8944 instances will slowly be converted to node (sometimes in the middle of a building=* object)
Example : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3342939725
That's why a validation info or warning may really be welcome to help to down transformers as a way to 0.
comment:14 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:16 by , 9 years ago
Replying to francois.lacombe:
Thank you Klumbumbus for the edits so far
Regarding power=transformer on ways/areas : mappers really shouldn't use this.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dtransformer
The 8944 instances will slowly be converted to node (sometimes in the middle of a building=* object)
Example : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3342939725
That's why a validation info or warning may really be welcome to help to down transformers as a way to 0.
OK, done.
I limited the missing voltage info to plants/generators with generator:output:electricity/plant:output:electricity
comment:17 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
follow-up: 20 comment:19 by , 9 years ago
Replying to Klumbumbus:
I limited the missing voltage info to plants/generators with generator:output:electricity/plant:output:electricity
This is definitely right, thank you to have noticed that
Replying to Klumbumbus:
Ok, the rest are java tests.
Does this mean that the validation is hardcoded in Java instead of mapcss validator files ?
comment:20 by , 9 years ago
Replying to francois.lacombe:
Replying to Klumbumbus:
Ok, the rest are java tests.
Does this mean that the validation is hardcoded in Java instead of mapcss validator files ?
Yes. And that I'm not able to write Java code :)
comment:22 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:24 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
follow-up: 26 comment:25 by , 9 years ago
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
That's all for this month. Can you please create a new tickets with remaining items for next milestone?
In 9494/josm: