Opened 5 years ago
Last modified 5 years ago
#19217 new defect
Split way: Wrong position of new member under special conditions of route relation
Reported by: | skyper | Owned by: | team |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | Core | Version: | latest |
Keywords: | template_report split way route relation order | Cc: |
Description
This is a followup of #18596 and might be related to #18018.
Please, use attached example file: josm_split_way_relation_order.osm
What steps will reproduce the problem?
- Open road relation "A 1" in relation editor and look at the order
- Select node "split" and split way
- Reload data in relation editor and look at the order
What is the expected result?
The new member should be added in between the last "forward" member and the last member with empty role
What happens instead?
The new member is added behind the last member with empty role
Please provide any additional information below. Attach a screenshot if possible.
link
is used in route relations and should only be considered to connect with other members with role link
. For empty role members they should be the last option.
The bus relation "1" shows the same issue but without link
.
In both cases, it is not needed to look at the relation list neighbor below as the correct position can already be determined by the neighbor above which is connected.
Relative:URL: ^/trunk Repository:UUID: 0c6e7542-c601-0410-84e7-c038aed88b3b Last:Changed Date: 2020-05-10 15:58:34 +0200 (Sun, 10 May 2020) Revision:16402 Build-Date:2020-05-11 01:30:50 URL:https://josm.openstreetmap.de/svn/trunk
Attachments (1)
Change History (5)
comment:1 by , 5 years ago
Version: | → latest |
---|
by , 5 years ago
Attachment: | josm_split_way_relation_order.osm added |
---|
comment:2 by , 5 years ago
Found another problem with role forward
and did update the example file.
- Look at bus relation "2" and split at "split again"
The new member is added at the wrong position.
- Does not happen with
backward
see relation "2B". - Does not happen at node "A".
comment:3 by , 5 years ago
I see two problems in the current code:
1) It first looks at the member above, than at the member below. It doesn't care when both give conflicting information.
2) The role link
is not considered special
example file