type=disused:route should not be treated as high priority alert

[matkoniecz]

While keeping historic data about suspended routes forever is invalid, this check reports all of them.

And when route is suspended for say 6 months it makes sense to tag it as say type=disused:route rather than later recreate it (unless report should be complaining that proper tagging is disused:type=route? Both are in use https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org//search?q=disused%3Atype#keys https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=type%3Ddisused%3Aroute#tags (

When report an issue on existing analyser, in addition on the name of the issue, report:

item 3040
class 3040

https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/issue/bf46ce0a-be63-76ff-43c8-55a5eeb1b03d

https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=18&lat=50.079719&lon=20.064033&item=xxxx&level=1&issue_uuid=ef2482aa-8ef0-eb5d-5273-0563ea0e7d78

[frodrigo]

It comes from here

https://github.com/osm-fr/osmose-backend/blob/master/plugins/TagFix_BadValue.py#L47

A generic rule allowing some values by regex.

Note there is already some exceptions, but we cannot list all exceptions like this
https://github.com/osm-fr/osmose-backend/blob/master/plugins/TagFix_BadValue.py#L75

Not sure what to do with that.

[Famlam]

I thought the life cycle prefixes were only for the keys, not for the values? (If not, let's hope there won't ever be a shop called disused:computers or we wouldn't be able to name it, for instance)

It seems to be pretty rare also, mostly restricted to type=disused:route(_master): taginfo for *=disused* . Maybe this is due to people trying to avoid this validation rule in JOSM? (I mean, if you in JOSM want to mark a bus route as disused, and you use disused:route, you'll get the warning route relation without route tag. To avoid that you could say disused:type, but then you'll get the warning relation without type)

[matkoniecz]

I thought the life cycle prefixes were only for the keys, not for the values?

On the other hand relations require type ....

No idea which is better - but if we have clear preference then it is qualifying for an obvious bot edit (not manual drudgery) and if there is no obvious preference then it is not a high priority issue.

If not, let's hope there won't ever be a shop called disused:computers or we wouldn't be able to name it, for instance

There are some like that - but I am fixing them/gathering more popular for bot edit. See https://codeberg.org/matkoniecz/OpenStreetMap_cleanup_scripts/src/branch/master/script_assisted_cleanup/shops_migrate_complex_cases.py and https://codeberg.org/matkoniecz/OpenStreetMap_cleanup_scripts/src/branch/master/recurrent_bot_edits/NEXT_shops_migrate_complex_cases.py (https://codeberg.org/matkoniecz/OpenStreetMap_cleanup_scripts/src/branch/master/recurrent_bot_edits/shops_migrate_complex_cases.py does not exist yet, approved bot edit will be there once I have enough time for that - BTW, if someone wants to contribute/use that code feel free to do so, just remember about following OSM bot edit rules and how manual cleanup should be done)