#18051 closed defect (fixed)
Validator shows warning 'Way end node near other highway' for ways on different layers
Reported by: | Luvot | Owned by: | team |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 19.09 |
Component: | Core validator | Version: | |
Keywords: | template_report | Cc: |
Description (last modified by )
What steps will reproduce the problem?
- Run validation on Way: Via ferrata dell'Infernone (osmwww:way/224887680)
What is the expected result?
No 'Way end node near other highway' warnings.
What happens instead?
Warning 'Way end node near other highway' is shown for
Way: Via ferrata dell'Infernone (224887680)
Node: 940690037
The node is the end point of a bridge over the way. The bridge is marked as layer=1.
The way is not marked as layer=0, because the tag is unnecessary.
If I mark the way as layer=0, then the 'Way end node near other highway' warning is not shown, but I get a new warning saying 'Unnecessary tag - layer=0 is unnecessary'
Please provide any additional information below. Attach a screenshot if possible.
URL:https://josm.openstreetmap.de/svn/trunk Repository:UUID: 0c6e7542-c601-0410-84e7-c038aed88b3b Last:Changed Date: 2019-07-10 00:52:47 +0200 (Wed, 10 Jul 2019) Build-Date:2019-07-10 01:30:51 Revision:15238 Relative:URL: ^/trunk Identification: JOSM/1.5 (15238 en) Linux Debian GNU/Linux 9.9 (stretch) Memory Usage: 839 MB / 1820 MB (390 MB allocated, but free) Java version: 1.8.0_212-8u212-b01-1~deb9u1-b01, Oracle Corporation, OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM Screen: :0.0 1920x1080 Maximum Screen Size: 1920x1080 Java package: openjdk-8-jre:amd64-8u212-b01-1~deb9u1 WebStart package: icedtea-netx:amd64-1.6.2-3.1+deb9u1 Java ATK Wrapper package: libatk-wrapper-java:all-0.33.3-13+deb9u1 libcommons-compress-java: libcommons-compress-java:all-1.13-1 libcommons-logging-java: libcommons-logging-java:all-1.2-1 fonts-noto: fonts-noto:all-20161116-1 liboauth-signpost-java: liboauth-signpost-java:all-1.2.1.2-1.5 VM arguments: [-Dicedtea-web.bin.name=javaws, -Dicedtea-web.bin.location=/usr/bin/javaws, -Djava.security.manager, -Djava.security.policy=/etc/icedtea-web/javaws.policy] Dataset consistency test: No problems found Last errors/warnings: - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273745/187411 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273746/187409 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273747/187409 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273746/187411 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273745/187409 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273744/187410 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273744/187409 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273747/187410 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273746/187410 - E: Region [TMS_BLOCK_v2] Failure getting from disk, key = Bing aerial imagery:https://www.bing.com/maps/19/273744/187411
Attachments (3)
Change History (13)
comment:1 by , 5 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:2 by , 5 years ago
comment:3 by , 5 years ago
The warning was shown after I edited the area, while I was uploading the change.
If I run the validator now, no warning is shown for me either.
Attached an .osm file where I have:
- reverted my change
- redone one of the edits, i.e. split Way: Via ferrata dell'Infernone (224887680) at Node: 2337318224
I can repro with these steps:
- open bug-infernone.osm
- click 'Upload data'
A 'Suspicious data found' window with the warning opens, and afterwards the warning is also shown in the validation results. See also attached screenshot.
comment:4 by , 5 years ago
Yes, irritating. The reason is that - during upload - the validator checks only the updated objects. Maybe it would be better to disable this test when only partial data is tested.
comment:5 by , 5 years ago
Test makes no sense with partial data as references. As it is useful on upload, we need to have it run on modified objects on upload but always use the full data as reference.
comment:6 by , 5 years ago
I agree. The current code only works with full data, so one approach would be to always check full data and filter results if upload or a selection was tested. That would add a rather big delay when you try to upload a small change made to a large dataset. I am looking for a better algorithm...
comment:7 by , 5 years ago
Hmm, there is a lot of code which cannot work since r4058: Changing preference validator.UnconnectedWays.way_way_distance
has no effect. Seems that nobody missed the results of that test?
I tried to fix the code to make it work again but I am not sure if the results are useful, lot's of informational messages about nodes which are close to another way, e.g. two closed landuse ways with a small gap between them.
by , 5 years ago
Attachment: | 18051.patch added |
---|
comment:8 by , 5 years ago
Work in progress:
The attached patch changes the data flow so that the test is always run against full data. If partial data is tested (selected objects or on upload) the found errors are filtered.
The patch improves throughput and thus performs much better on full data. I think there is still room for more improvements, and I'd like to add some more unit tests. It also fixes the problemms regarding validator.UnconnectedWays.way_way_distance.
I am not yet sure about nodes outside the download area. The unpatched version ignores them, the patched version complains when the node is modified or new.
comment:10 by , 5 years ago
Milestone: | → 19.09 |
---|
Replying to Luvot:
Not for me, it seems you edited the area as there is no ending way near that bridge anymore.
Could you please (locally in JOSM only) revert to the state before your edit, save as osm file and attach it here?