ohsome filters

[tyrasd]

Allows to use an ohsome filter directly in an oshdb query: mapReducer.filter("amenity=bench and type:node or leisure=park and geometry:polygon");. This includes the optimizations implemented in the ohsome-api.

todo:

• add to documentation
• write unit tests
• use stable release instead of snapshot of ohsome-filter
• test serialization (for ignite)

Changes proposed in this pull request:

Type of change

• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• This change requires a documentation update

New or changed dependencies:

• ohsome-filter (version 1.4.0)

Checklist

• My code follows the code-style rules and I have checked on the static analyses and benchmark (if applicable) results
• I have commented my code
• I have written javadoc (required for public methods)
• I have added sufficient unit tests
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have updated the CHANGELOG.md
• I have adjusted the examples and benchmark if necessary

🚧 wip 🚧

• switch to non-snapshot of ohsome-filter v1.4

[tyrasd]

this should be ready to be tested now. only open question from my side would be if we should update the documentation and examples now, or during the release of v0.6?

[joker234]

Looks good apart from some smaller issues. I suppose the tests cover all important units and cases, that are not yet already tested in the ohsome filter library.

What's with the example/benchmark checkpoint? Is this still an open TODO?

[joker234]

this should be ready to be tested now. only open question from my side would be if we should update the documentation and examples now, or during the release of v0.6?

Would you redo the documentation and examples totally for the next release? If yes, I think we can do that until then. If you only want to add something about ohsome filters, why not add this within this PR?

[tyrasd]

What's with the example/benchmark checkpoint? Is this still an open TODO?

that was mean more like a question to you guys. I guess we can leave it as is and rework the examples & benchmark at a later time: they do still work with the "old" syntax (.osmTag, etc). but at some point one could switch them as well.

[tyrasd]

Would you redo the documentation and examples totally for the next release?

That's also a somewhat open question. IMHO we can leave it as is (the new filter is documented as a variant/option in this PR), and maybe redo the whole documentation for the release after the next (and maybe also deprecate the "old" filters in that process as well)

[joker234]

I would say we redo the documentation separately at least for the 1.0 version. @tyrasd do you want to create an issue for that?