Flamen_Sru's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 174760757 | about 2 months ago | Hi toster234,
|
| 173703077 | 2 months ago | Based on the ground-level imagery, this junction cannot be classified as a mini_roundabout, as it is not traversable. And since there are yield signs, it can be identified as a roundabout. junction=roundabout also provides photographic examples to help editors decide. I suggest creating a circular polygon with a roundabout tag to accurately represent the traffic flow. |
| 173703077 | 2 months ago | Hi René84828, thank you for reaching out. Since the centre island is traversable, I converted it to a mini roundabout, in accordance with the documentation on OSM Wiki (highway=mini_roundabout). Please let me know if you are thinking different, I’ll be happy to discuss. |
| 173609248 | 3 months ago | Hi Tomas Straupis, thank you for reaching out and thank you for making the corrections. I have reviewed the discussion on K-modeling (osm.wiki/Talk:Tag:junction%3Droundabout#Connecting_ways_to_roadabouts) and this junction looks like it falls within that definition. |
| 173609453 | 3 months ago | Hi Tomas Straupis, thank you for reaching out and thank you for making the corrections. I have reviewed the discussion on K-modeling (osm.wiki/Talk:Tag:junction%3Droundabout#Connecting_ways_to_roadabouts) and this junction looks like it falls within that definition. |
| 173608757 | 3 months ago | Hi Tomas Straupis, thank you for reaching out and thank you for making the corrections. I have reviewed the discussion on K-modeling (osm.wiki/Talk:Tag:junction%3Droundabout#Connecting_ways_to_roadabouts) and this junction looks like it falls within that definition. |
| 173563446 | 3 months ago | Glad to help, happy mapping |
| 173609248 | 3 months ago | Hi Tomas Straupis, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you |
| 173609453 | 3 months ago | Hi Tomas Straupis, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you |
| 173608757 | 3 months ago | Hi Tomas Straupis, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you |
| 167860285 | 3 months ago | Hi Mxdanger for pointing this out. I have made the corrections and I will be more aware of the member ordering in relations. |
| 147689970 | 6 months ago | Hi mstrbrid, thanks again for reaching out. I had to review the situation as the changeset is over a year old. In this case, there are multiple traffic calming features, which at the time I interpreted as physical barriers. I see you already made changes in the map, so I'll hold off making any reversions. |
| 147689970 | 6 months ago | Hi mstrbrid, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you |
| 167736864 | 7 months ago | Hi Supaplex, thank you for reverting the changeset. While I have referred the wiki for information on classification based on shields, during the reevaluation of my changes I also found the dedicated note about The Zhongshan Elevated Road. I have included this information in our knowledge base for future edits. |
| 153572671 | 10 months ago | Hi mikefalzon,
|
| 153572671 | 10 months ago | Hi mikefalzon , Thank you for feedback. I will analyze situation and get back to you. |
| 162207431 | 11 months ago | Hi ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy I interpreted the signs in the ground imagery to indicate that a HOV lane existed here. However, after receiving your comment I reassessed and realized that this was not the case so thank you for making the corrections. |
| 144364027 | about 1 year ago | Hi Baloo Uriza, Thank you for making the corrections. I had removed the duplicate barrier and then added motor_vehicle=yes to the barrier which I now realize with your feedback was not necessary. I'll be more careful working on access/permissive tags to avoid making the same mistake again. |
| 152178480 | over 1 year ago | Hello Marcos Medeiros
|
| 148010081 | over 1 year ago | Thank you for your valuable feedback! |