You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If tagging a node by manually choosing a preset item in Vespucci you don't find "Ford" and "Roundabout" in the group "Waypoint" of "Highways", but only in the group "Streets" (because these 2 items can be applied to nodes AND ways, I know). But I think, that is quite confusing (for a user).
For a better user experience, you could double these 2 items (I know, redundancy is normally a bad thing …) and put:
One in the group "Streets" of "Highways" with type="way"
One in the group "Waypoints" of "Highways" with type="node"
In this case, I would pay the redundancy price of a double item in the xml file and prioritise the better user experience. And for matching, it also should be no problem, I think.
Other benefits of such a solution:
The group "Streets" will not be shown at all if tagging a node and choosing a preset item manually.
You could perhaps reduce the list of keys in the "Roundabout" item with the node type, e.g. because "lanes" should only be used on ways (according to the wiki)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In general a lot of the questionable stuff in the presets comes from the original JOSM version. I'm a bit reluctant to change these things without good reasons as on the one hand it implies that somebody using JOSM won't be able to find the preset items so easily and 2nd that it makes comparing with the JOSM variant more difficult.
That said having "Waypoints" in the first place is a bit weird and I would think that completely rearranging the "Highway" section might be a good idea.
If tagging a node by manually choosing a preset item in Vespucci you don't find "Ford" and "Roundabout" in the group "Waypoint" of "Highways", but only in the group "Streets" (because these 2 items can be applied to nodes AND ways, I know). But I think, that is quite confusing (for a user).
For a better user experience, you could double these 2 items (I know, redundancy is normally a bad thing …) and put:
In this case, I would pay the redundancy price of a double item in the xml file and prioritise the better user experience. And for matching, it also should be no problem, I think.
Other benefits of such a solution:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: