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?

We know that rarad74 is enforcing the living_street tagging in the region where he's most active (Bucharest area). As far as we've discussed in the community, the general consensus is to use the more internationally-aligned service road, but also follow local rules if the area is using a different scheme.

Salut,
Este deschisă Pasarela Blașcovici-Strada Gării? Știu că anul trecut a fost scandal că au închis-o fără a oferi alternativă, STPT a introdus linia 5B ca să ofere o legătură.

Când am trecut prin zonă părea că era închisă cu plasă de sârmă.

Am greșit ștergând-o?

Hello lampronessa,

I observed that in this changeset that you reclassified a lot of former service roads in Giroc to living_streets. This change sparked a discussion inside the Romanian OSM community Telegram group (https://t.me/OSMRomania/20212) and the common opinion was that living_street is not the correct tag for this situation.

"A living street or residential street is a street designed with the interests of pedestrians and cyclists in mind" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_street highway=living_street ). We believe that we should only tag streets as living_street only the streets that are designed, marked and enforced as a street with pedestrian priority. This is usually seen by the use of the traffic sign "Zonă rezidențială" which limits the vehicular speeds to 20km/h and enforces priority for pedestrians.

What we see in Giroc new developments are former rural plots that were divided in multiple lots where houses or medium-density apartment buildings were build with a common access road to the main street. On those access roads, even if we see that pedestrians use the main carriageway (as they are often build without proper separation and/or sidewalks), their main purpose is still for vehicular access to the buildings. Thus, we think that the correct tag for them is highway=service (The highway=service tag denotes ways used for vehicle access to a building, parking lot, service station, business estate, beach, campsite, etc. - highway=service ).

If you agree with our designations, I can help on retagging to mitigating the issue and you can join us on the telegram group for further discussions.

Thanks.

Thanks, it looks good, you can keep one way or do another separation at the entrance, however you like.
Keep up the good work!

Hello,
Is the left turn into Coca Cola when coming from Becicherec not a legal maneuver anymore? Based on the newly drawn geometry, this turn doesn't seem to be accounted for. Also please avoid separating directions if there is no physical separation between them, this is a common rule of OSM.

Hello,
Please use the Square tool (right-click -> Square or press Q) to draw orthogonal shapes, I don't think those houses don't have 90 degree corners.

Please don't use the name tag for descriptions, it should be used only for proper names

the name tag should be used only for proper names, not for descriptions
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173844526

Hello,
please be careful, you moved by mistake a node and merged it with a nearby road, see https://osmcha.org/changesets/173844032 for a visual representation of your edit. This can happen if you scroll around the map by mistake.
I fixed your mistake

Hello,
please be careful, you moved by mistake a road, see https://osmcha.org/changesets/173888497 for a visual representation of your edit
I reverted your changeset

Hello,
Please use the Square tool (right-click -> Square or press Q) to draw orthogonal shapes, I don't think those houses don't have 90 degree corners.
There is also a fork of the default editor which uses AI to draw buildings, you can give this tool to your class and make a much faster job: rapideditor.org

Btw, there is a fork of the default editor which uses AI to draw buildings, you can give this tool to your class and make a much faster job: rapideditor.org

Hello,
Please use the Square tool (right-click -> Square or press Q) to draw orthogonal shapes, I don't think those houses don't have 90 degree corners.

Hello,
please be careful, you moved by mistake a road, see https://osmcha.org/changesets/173888267 for a visual representation of your edit
I reverted your changeset

Footway bridge has been demolished in July. It was also removed from the map at that point. I reverted this changeset.