On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 3:39 PM Yves <yve...@mailbox.org> wrote: > Some validation tools, like Osmose, make great efforts to maintain a > 'false positive' database. >
If the same validation is done by multiple tools, they need to share the "false positive" data, otherwise only one tool would know not to change something, while another tool will encourage the user to make the same mistake. So we either have to set up an OSM shadow database that contains all exceptions, e.g. "object NNNN is exempt from validation XXXX", or this data should be stored in the object itself, which seems to be a far more robust approach (same data store allows data consistency / versioning / user management / tracking / consistency between tools / same processing pipeline / ...). If the objection to this is that users don't want to see junk data, I agree -- but we could simply dedicate a key namespace to validations, and hide it by default in JOSM and iD.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
