Hoi Fabian,

Dankjewel voor je reactie :)

Het makkelijkst voor zoiets kleins is denk ik gewoon een punt terugplaatsen op de plek van het oude punt en hier de tags op zetten die eerder op de adresnode stonden (alle addr: en source tags): node/2680207387/history/3

Groet,
Bovi887

Hoi Blinmaster,

Bij het mergen heb je de adresnode van nr. 1 herboemd naar 1a en die van 1a verwijderd. Hierdoor heeft nr. 1 geen adresnode meer. Volgens het bag bestaat nr. 1 wel. Weet je zeker dat het de bedoeling was om deze te verwijderen?

Groet,
Bovi887

Hi SharpeSerana,

It seems like some of your recent changes have broken validation of the Transilien network in the subway validator: https://mapgen-fi-1.comaps.app/subway/validator/france.html

In general every route variant should just have one stop position per station and a continues track list that can be followed from start to end so it is routable.

Could you please take a look?

Thanks and happy mapping!
Bovi887

Hi,

Thanks for the detailed explanation of the situation and thanks a lot for already making everyone happy :)
The validator loves it ;)

Hi Bxl-forever,

I see you have reverted some of my and jbcharrons changesets. I'm not sure if I understand why it would be better to have separate stop areas for each direction. We don't do this for train stations as far as i know, and many light rail and subway systems don't have this eather.

The reason why we combined them is to make it clear which stop positions belong to the same station, so it can be processed by the subway validator and shown in apps like CoMaps: https://mapgen-fi-1.comaps.app/subway/validator/belgium.html One could arue this is tagging for the renderer, but because this is done this way almost everywhere, I don't think it is.

Alternatively, if you prefer to keep the stop areas separate, maybe we could add stop area groups to group the stop areas together to make it clear they belong to one station.

What are your thoughts on this?

Kind regards,
Bovi887

Thanks! Fixed, including platform and tracks: changeset/184379492#map=11/48.6481/2.2108

Thanks for letting me know. I changed it because the stop was not on the tracks included in the route. I've changed it back now, including the tracks: changeset/184198489

Hi Carto'Cité,
I'm sorry, I've read a lot of these notes like this one, so I'm a bit confused that I've looked over it here. Thanks for restoring it!
Regards,
Bovi887

You can also use the subway validator, which signals tagging mistakes of rapid transit networks: https://mapgen-fi-1.comaps.app/subway/validator/france.html

Happy mapping,
Bovi887

Hi Kalemillon,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap!

I see you have added the station node of Savigny-sur-Orge to several RER route relations. This is not needed, because there are are already a stop position and a platform of this station in the routes. For more information see this wiki page: osm.wiki/Public_transport#Service_routes

Dank voor de snelle reactie :)
Dan snap ik de situatie iets beter. Ik ben ook geen expert op dit gebied, maar misschien het afgesloten deel dat nog wel zichtbaar is voorlopig nog laten staan met een lifecycle-prefix (osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix#Stages_of_decay) om opnieuw intekenen te voorkomen, als het niet meer zichtbaar is kan het er dan helemaal uit. Dan zou je iets van was:highway=path krijgen om aan te duiden dat het geen pad meer is, maar wel is geweest, eventueel i.c.m. access=no voor de duidelijkheid.

Groet, Bovi887

Beste RPGUITL,

Ten eerste: Welkom bij OpenStreetMap!

Wat feedback: Graag alleen paden verwijderen die niet meer bestaan en waar ook geen sporen meer van te zien zijn. Paden die afgesloten zijn kunnen gemarkeerd worden als zodanig met de tag access=private. Door het volledig weghalen riskeer je dat een andere mapper het pad opnieuw intekent zonder access tags. Daarnaast zijn er nog wat andere redenen waarom we niet toegankelijke paden wel op OpenStreetMap hebben staan, hiervoor verwijs ik graag naar deze wiki-pagina met meer informatie: osm.wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F

Met vriendelijke groet,
Bovi887

Hi coconuts2,

A lot of you recent changesets almost exclusively delete train route relations. Can you please explain what your source for this is?

Kind regards,
Bovi887

Hi coconuts2,

Thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap.

Please don't combine both directions in one route relation. All variations of a route should have their own route relation, these relations are then grouped by a route_master relation. You can read more about public transport route tagging on this wiki page: osm.wiki/Public_transport#Service_routes

Also, please write a short comment describing your edits, so other mappers can better understand them. Read more about good changeset comments here: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Kind regards,
Bovi887

Hi xSabinaE,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Instead of changing the station type, you've changed the platform to a station. So now there are two station elements. The station is tagged on a seperate node: node/5205931550
This node has station=halt which already looks good to me, as this is how stations without railway switches are usually tagged.

I've changed the platform back to a platform.

Happy mapping,
Bovi887

Thanks a lot for the additional information! I've removed Obelya station from the route of the M4 line again.

I understand, I was just a bit confused as it was removed with this reason some months ago. Might be best to change the role of the station to inactive than. I'll do this. I don't think all of the tracks are under construction, so I'll leave those as they are.

Hi Monolo23, Thanks for your contributions!

Are you sure Obelya station, which you re-added to line M4, is served by the M4 metro again? As far as I can find online service between Slivnitsa and Obelya station is still suspended due to construction works.

Sorry, bron is survey en bedrijfswebsites

Beste Tjuro,

Dat is duidelijke uitleg, daar heb ik wat aan, dank.

Is het dan in elk geval logisch om nog de naam van de molen (en POI) te te voegen aan het POI? Dat was wat mij ineerste instantie in verwarring bracht. Of gaan we dan dingen onnodig dubbel taggen?

Met vriendelijke groet,
Bovi887