Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Catch more invalid polygon situations #4745

Open
Marc-marc-marc opened this issue Jan 25, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

Catch more invalid polygon situations #4745

Marc-marc-marc opened this issue Jan 25, 2018 · 4 comments
Labels
considering Not Actionable - still considering if this is something we want

Comments

@Marc-marc-marc
Copy link
Contributor

Marc-marc-marc commented Jan 25, 2018

Thanks for the new test to avoid creating a self-crossing invalid polygon.
but I see that a user is still able to make a invalid polygon that make a "forward/backward" with a duplicate node
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/90262899
duplicate node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5356991998
node "external" to the polygon https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5356991994
it would be great if iD could prevent the user from creating invalid polygons

@bhousel
Copy link
Member

bhousel commented Jan 26, 2018

It's difficult to see what they did exactly, but there are still plenty of ways to create invalid polygons.

Here's a situation where I dragged a midpoint from one line on an outer way over to a different line on the same multipolygon. It probably shouldn't be allowed.

invalid 2

Also, iD only checks geometry in drag node and drawing modes. You can still select multiple things and just move them or rotate them to cause a self intersection.

invalid

@bhousel bhousel added the considering Not Actionable - still considering if this is something we want label Jan 26, 2018
@bhousel bhousel changed the title avoid invalid polygone Flag more invalid polygon situations Jan 26, 2018
@bhousel bhousel changed the title Flag more invalid polygon situations Catch more invalid polygon situations Jan 26, 2018
@Marc-marc-marc
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for considering this issue.
I have sent a message to this user to ask how he does exactly.
Did you prefer that I leave the error for some days or a printscreen before fixing it or the history of the object is enough ?

@bhousel
Copy link
Member

bhousel commented Jan 26, 2018

Did you prefer that I leave the error for some days or a printscreen before fixing it or the history of the object is enough ?

Looks like it was fixed in OSM already, but this is ok since I put some screen captures in the ticket.

@mmd-osm
Copy link
Contributor

mmd-osm commented Jan 27, 2018

Merge is also bypassing self-intersection checks...

peek 2018-01-27 21-34

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
considering Not Actionable - still considering if this is something we want
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants