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

Parking lane overlay removes parking:condition #4515

Closed
Mbodin opened this issue Oct 17, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed

Parking lane overlay removes parking:condition #4515

Mbodin opened this issue Oct 17, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@Mbodin
Copy link

Mbodin commented Oct 17, 2022

Use case
I’m still experimenting with the parking lane overlay (which is great by the way! ☺). I just noted that this quest removed the parking:condition:both=ticket in this change: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/274763329/history
I understand the rational: if one is using this overlay, then probably something changed and we’re better reinitialising all parking-related keys.

In this case, however, it feels wrong: my answer only refined the previous parking:lane:both=parallel by an additional key parking:lane:both:parallel=street_side. The in-place situation did not change (in this specific place) from what was before.

As-is, StreetComplete removed an information without the interface telling me: it feels wrong to me.

Proposed Solution
As already suggested, we could keep the current behaviour and add a parking condition quest: #771 (comment)
We could also keep the parking:condition key, but add a special quest to confirm whether it still applies (I’m not sure whether this would integrate well into the software).

I however feel that in case where the answer is only a refinement of what was already there (for instance when no key value changed: we only added new keys), then no key should be removed. This has the advantage of not needing a new quest type for parking condition. I don't know whether this is particular to the parking lane overlay or whether it could apply to other quests.

@Helium314
Copy link
Collaborator

see #4501

@mnalis
Copy link
Member

mnalis commented Oct 17, 2022

Duplicate of #4501

@mnalis mnalis marked this as a duplicate of #4501 Oct 17, 2022
@mnalis mnalis closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Oct 17, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants