Bună analiză, eu rămăsesem cu impresia că pavajul roșu e clar majoritar, dar acuma că mi-ai arătat imeginile de sus îmi dau seama că nu e cazul. Sunt de acord cu tine în acest caz.

Salut, sett se referă la piatră cubică, vezi wiki: surface=sett
Pentru pavaje de orice tip de folosește surface=paving_stones
Astfel era corect marcată poată libertății cu paving stones

Reverted in changeset/190738405

Hello Iulian,
According to OSM guidelines, a road should only be splitted if there is a physicial barrier between the directions. Which here it is not the case.
See osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway
"Roads are not to be mapped as dual carriageways if the two directions are only separated

by paint. This includes single or multiple painted centre lines[1], hatched areas, channelized turn lanes[2], two-way turn lanes[2],
by flush medians[3],
or by any other means that is not a physical barrier to vehicles."

Hello karto_monkey,
Indeed the railway has been completely dismantled, so the relation should be historic. I will make the necessary changes.

@rarad74, se pare că Mihaita Mandea continuă după vechile obiceiuri. Changeseturi dubioase, fără explicații, în care adaugă denumiri în masă, neexplicate și greu de verificat. Tind să cred că ori se inspiră dintr-o sursă externă neidentificată - probabil cu licență incompatibilă, sau sunt pur și simplu inventate. Pe vechiul său cont @Mihai%20Mandea a fost prins de multiple ori adăugând elemente inventate, pe acest nou cont s-a abținut și adaugă denumiri generice. Propun să-l raportăm direct căci nu cred că vom vedea vreun răspuns sau remediere din partea sa.

Reverted in #185417204

Reverted in #185417204

Changeset reverted in #185417204

#185417204

#185417204

Reverted in #185417204

Changeset reverted in #185416338

Changeset reverted in #185415913.
Please add real data on the map.

Hello,

Connection road between Bolyai/Ștefan cel Mare and crossing towards Bradului was closed a few years ago and parking allowed in the area, the connecting road piece was deleted at that point.

I see you have added it back, is the turn allowed again?

This seems to be the decision of some specific routers. There is no rule that highway=crossing has a different penalty than highway=traffic_signal. I would argue that a lot of routers will probably treat them both the same as they have the crossing=traffic_signal tag.

Unfortunately, we don't really have a specific tag to mark what you are looking for (separate light phases).

Hello, why do you simplify the traffic lights tagging scheme?
Both variants are accepted by the OSM standard: highway=traffic_signals
I see no benefit in changing something that is already correct

Salutare,
am observat că ai făcut niște editări în zona Roșiești. Calitatea acestora pare îndoielnică, nu se practică cartarea fiecărui câmp individual, nu se practică trecerea de denumiri descriptive (ex. teren/drum), iar ultimele modificări nu par a corespunde cu realitatea

- I understand the natural connecting lines reason, however I do not believe the paths mentioned are good examples of this. I do not agree that the lack of them "strongly devalues the OSM network", but on the contrary, I would like OSM to have mapped the actual state of the network, with legal, safe or at least commonly used ways, which those are neither.
- It is not legal to cross here. Romanian legislation is permitting crossing at street intersections if there are no nearby marked pedestrian crossings, which is certainly not the case here (no street intersection, and the nearest crossing to the paths mapped are at 70, 100 and 110 meters, which while there is no legal distance mentioned, I would argue is not enough for the law to be in effect)

Hello, there are no crossings here, neither legal and safe way to cross at those points, neither commonly used by pedestrians. Why did you mark those pathways?