Collect guidepost/map metadata (ref,ele,name)

[qugebert]

closes #476

Three additional quests to collect name,ref and elevation of information=guidepost or information=map.

[mcliquid]

@qugebert What's missing / How could I support you here?

[qugebert]

@qugebert What's missing / How could I support you here?
Sorry, i just forgot this PR, and yesterday i noticed there have been many concerns against this so i first need to get an idea which parts of this still would be accepted and what i need to change.

[Helium314]

Some short summary of what I remember after quickly going over the discussion:

• an ele quest should be fine, but needs a clear warning about not using GPS, and only entering plausible data (as per the warning in the wiki)
• name is probably fine too, though on the other hand users can also modify the place name quest. Should still clarify what a name for a guidepost is, as there are many without a sign like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Signpost.jpg, but with a lot of other Text people may use as a name.
• For ref it should be clarified what goes in there. Looking at random places I found nearby routes, UTM coordinates, distances (like track km) and what appears to be refs for the guidepost itself. Usually this differs by region, probably because of how they are signed, and possibly also because personal style of individual very active mappers.

[Helium314]

Considering streetcomplete#5412, this PR should be done before the mentioned changes.
Do you want to continue here, or do you need anything from me?

The "technical" part seems to be mostly ok, except for the ele:signed part and the inclusion of maps (very low usage of those tags, not documented).

What's left is clarifications about what a guidepost ref or name is / should (not) contain, and the warning about ele.

[qugebert]

Ok, so how should i treat the can't answer - case for the elevation then?

[Helium314]

Just remove the option. SCEE quests sometimes are not answerable, which is mentioned both on first start and in the default EE disabled message.
This is not a great solution, but SCEE should not add such tags. If ele:signed is already set, the quest is not asked anyway due to !~"ele:.*" (which the user can still set in tag editor).

[qugebert]

Ok, i modified the ele quest.
Any idea, how to describe the difference between ref and name?
ref:signed and name:signed=no is ok, as it is still etablished?

[Helium314]

ref:signed and name:signed=no is ok, as it is still etablished?

Both are already set by SC, so it's definitely fine

[qugebert]

Ok, i modified the form, so that there is a hint at the ref and name quest.

But someone else should look over the strings, i'm not good with englisch language.

[Helium314]

Maybe the element selection could also exclude guidepost=simple, and possibly include guidepost (there are some occurrences where guidepost is tagged without information=guidepost)

[qugebert]

Maybe the element selection could also exclude guidepost=simple, and possibly include guidepost (there are some occurrences where guidepost is tagged without information=guidepost)

I changed this, is the query ok now?
Sorry, I have no possibillity to compile/test this the next days.

[Helium314]

Looks ok now, I'll do some actual testing in the next week or so

[Helium314]

Had a short test and looks good.

Name input should start with uppercase (should work when using InputType.TYPE_TEXT_FLAG_CAP_SENTENCES)
ele input could allow for decimals, but I'll leave the decision to you.

The icons could use some tuning:

• I find the name a bit hard to read due to small size
• Guidepost using the address icon looks a little weird, I prefer the style of the guidepost sports quest
• ID is used instead of ref as text in other quest icons (hydrant ID icon looks nice and reusable)

But if you don't want to adjust the icons it's fine too.

[qugebert]

@Helium314 Sorry, I only had the time to take care of the icons now and graphic design is not really my forte, so i tried to reuse parts of existing icons.
i'm still not really satisfied but i think it's at least better than the previous set.

Need i make another PR for this now?

[Helium314]

Thanks, this looks really good!
Please open another PR, as this is already merged.