Changeset: 135147875
#potmch https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/38520
Closed by Tursiops33
Tags
changesets_count | 833 |
---|---|
created_by | iD 2.25.1 |
hashtags | #potmch |
host | https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit |
imagery_used | Kanton Zurich, Orthofoto ZH Frühjahr 2021 RGB 5cm |
locale | fr |
resolved:almost_junction:highway-highway | 1 |
resolved:crossing_ways:building-highway | 1 |
resolved:crossing_ways:highway-highway | 19 |
resolved:crossing_ways:highway-railway | 474 |
resolved:crossing_ways:railway-railway | 4 |
resolved:missing_tag:relation_type | 2 |
resolved:outdated_tags:incomplete_tags | 95 |
resolved:outdated_tags:noncanonical_brand | 1 |
review_requested | yes |
Discussion
-
Comment from d_berger
Review: stop clicking 'yes' on each and every SUGGESTION(!) that iD makes. "Suggestion" means: get your ass on the ground and confirm locally(!!!1). And if you don't know what the suggestion means, or aren't able to map the change manually (without help) by yourself, you shouldn't change it.
This is a changeset that a bot could have made. I'll wait for other comments, but this is far from acceptable. Learn the ropes, read the wiki, interact with the community. It's not the first time you get feedback for not getting acquainted with local rules, but just doing what iD suggests. You may waste your time if you feel like it, but please don't waste my time or the time of other mappers. TY
-
Comment from Tursiops33
Hello and thank you for your message, but i would like to defend myself. When i add details to crossings, and do it consistently for dozens of them, and then get 180 warnings, not suggestions, but warnings, meaning there's something wrong, i can't just submit my changes without addressing those. Most changes i've made to this are crossings of roads or walkpaths to the tram rails, so shouldn't those have crossings and be marked as such ? Yes i'm new here and i'm learning, but please be a bit more constructive with your critisim, i can take it and want to improve but saying i do a shitty job is not going to help anyone. Thanks!
-
Comment from d_berger
First some common sense: we map tracks (railway, tram) separate from the highway elements even if in the real world they actually share the same space. The highway element in itself is an abstraction (a line representing an area). So just because those lines are crossing in OSM, they don't constitute a crossing – again they share the same space.
But it's editors like iD, that can't make sense of it, and expect something that doesn't exist in the real world. In the shared space, where tram tracks occupy the same space, there is simply no such thing as a "tram_level_crossing", that's a spam tag to make iD shut up. It doesn't improve mapping a bit.
-
Comment from d_berger
Second, traffic_signals are mapped like documented in the wiki[1], in Zürich the last two schemes are in use. Mostly the one with the traffic_signal and the crossing on the same node. There aren't additional traffic signals on the footways, and we don't map physical locations of the traffic_signals.
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic_signals
-
Comment from d_berger
Don't put a layer on a highway, just because iD suggest it. It just conceals errors. There might be a building_passage missing. That's again something to make iD shut up, it doesn't improve anything. Same goes for noexit=yes, that's a tag to suppress warnings, it seldom improves mapping.
-
Comment from d_berger
And also please don't add defaults. On crossing=unmarked the addition of crossing:markings=no is redundant. On 'Trottoirüberfahrt' (not sure how it translates, ask Google for pictures) it's physically impossible to have a crossing:island. The default is always "crossing:island=no", it's just the questmakers that loath the idea of implicit defaults. We generally define objects by what they are (*=yes), and not by what they aren't, because that would be an endless list of useless data. With explicit sidewalk mapping, we have (ten-)thousands of "crossing", that aren't real crossings but just an acknowledgement, that a road passes over a sidewalk (pedestrian priority, and vehicles have to give way). This requires to think about mapping, and not just add tags because iD or StreetComplete suggest them.
Use the tag crossing:island only where crossing islands actually exist – however if the highway element is split around such islands "crossing:island=yes" is incorrect, because the node only represents the segment leading to the crossing island. That's again abstraction: you have an unsplitted way – you have to do an abstraction and get to add island=yes; you have a splitted way – no abstraction anymore and no island tag to add.
Also: a crossing island (or transit stop island) is _not_ a traffic calming element, this one[2] is. And here again: if the highway elements are splitted around, you don't get to tag it, because traffic_calming tags are designed as an abstract (node) in another abstract (way).
Ways (41-60 of 394)
- Stauffacherquai (15675937), v24
- Pflanzschulstrasse (26646994), v16
- Gessnerallee (27014785), v15
- 27361456, v18
- 27405360, v14
- Bahnhofstrasse (27405455), v60
- Kalkbreitestrasse (27433876), v25
- Elisabethenstrasse (27433890), v16
- 27434037, v10
- 27434191, v15
- Albisriederstrasse (28127417), v34
- Albisriederstrasse (28127420), v44
- 28176154, v12
- Badenerstrasse (28682875), v24
- Talacker (28767215), v20
- Stauffacherstrasse (29116100), v20
- Albisriederstrasse (30442679), v34
- 30748652, v15
- Pelikanstrasse (33695402), v18
- 36995464, v12
Relations (2)
Nodes (1-20 of 671)
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |