Not survey for source, misclick.

Sāku labot un atradās daudz kur vēl piemēri. ;) changeset/182245179

Es nezinu vai tas ir SC tulkojums slikts vai arī tu ne gluži korekti to lietoji. Īsumā - street_side nozīmē, ka parkošanās ir gar publisku ielu izdalītās "kabatiņās". Ja ir jānobrauc no ielas un jāiebrauc kaut kādā citā ceļā, laukumā, teritorijāutt. tad tas vairs nav uz ielas.

Secīgi strupceļos, necaurbraucamos pagalmos, DUS, automazgātavās, veikalu stāvvietās, privātās teritorijās, P zonās, utt. parasti nav street_side, bet vienkārši surface. Tādās vietās tā parkošanās var izskatīties ļoti līdzīgi ielas stāvvietām, bet pēc funkcijas OSM tie vairs nebūs. Jo doma ir - tu brauc pa publisku ielu, un uzreiz iebrauc gar ielu nodalītā parkošanās vietā, tad izbrauc ārā un brauc tālāk bez nekādiem pagalmiem, papildus ceļiem, ietvēm, iebrauktuvēm, utt.

Es gan piebildīšu, ka ir daudz piemēru, kur varētu diskutēt, kas tieši tur ir, īpaši visādos pagalmos. Es arī drošvien ne visur pareizi esmu salicis.

Čau vēlreiz, nezinu kā SC šo tulkojumā piedāvā, bet laikam nepareizi, jo šeit nebūs "gar ielu" parking=street_side.

Čau, vai te tiešām ir jaunas zīmes uzstādītas šajā posmā?

Please don't change highway links like way/664922703 to non-link classification. See OSM wiki documentation for details. This was correctly mapped as it connects two different roads outside the primary roundabout. This is a very standard example of a link road.

To be clearer - we should only change the names when the changes come into the effect - May 11. The stop names remain as they are until then or until RS changes their website data. Current navigation should still use the existing names (routes, stops, etc.) In fact, the new stops should not even be mapped as active until then, but that's a smaller issue.

Hello,

The existing stops do not appear to be renamed on RS website. According to the news post image, it also doesn't suggest them being renamed - it's the new stops that have name labels shows. I've restored the names.

No worries, I just wanted to clarify before I say one way or another, because there are multiple ways roads can be 20 kph (or it could have been an error too).

In any case, since this is a living zone in Latvia, then roads should be tagged as living streets, i.e. highway=living_street . Here is some more info osm.wiki/Lv:Latvian_tagging_guidelines#Maz%C4%81ki_ce%C4%BCi

Hello,

Is this area by any chance a living zone (dzīvojamā zona)? Or is the speed limit signed as signs or 20 zone?

Thanks

Please be aware that it the correct syntax is `LV:urban` with capitalized "LV" not `lv:urban`.

Does the living zone here way/124046924 end at a different location now? The latest street imagery suggest it was mapped correctly before. What has changed here?

Hello,

If a street is in a 30 zone, then it should not be a living street (which is only for living zones). For example, way/402489748 . If the road in incorrectly mapped as living street, then you should change it to a residential road or service road or whatever is appropriate. Or at least leave a note here that it needs to be fixed.

You are confusing an address point with a physical feature. There is no requirement for there to be "something" for an address to exist. The data is correct.

18. aprīlī aizlieguma zīmes vairs neredzēju. Tā gan sestdiena, nezinu, vai varēja būt noņemtas uz nogali.

Hello,

Please do not change seasonal speed limits for the main maxspeed value. These were already correctly mapped in maxspeed:conditional tags for approximate time periods.

I don't disagree that this is a stupid place for these signs. And the actual intent here is that cars shouldn't enter these footways. But regardless they are still traffic signs and legally binding and that's what OSM follows for tagging. Technically, anyone can get traffic signs installed if they can get municipality/council approval. I have no idea if these have been approved - one would have to contact municipality building authority department.

Hello, please don't delete/remove addresses. These are valid nodes by themselves that represent official data. These are automatically imported and mostly correct.

Ielas vēl nav izbūvētas - aktīvi darbi. Pašlaik grantenes. Dzīvojamā zona vēl nav uzlikta. Iebraukt teorētiski var; es gan neiebraucu, jo tur būvtehnika tieši braukāja.

What happened is you removed the building tag, which means this is no longer tagged as a building, but only parking. And additionally parking=surface means it's parking with a view of the sky, basically an open parking lot. Those were presumably not intended, so I can fix those, but I'm not sure I understand where the parking actually is (and was before). Is it underground? Looking at street imagery, I don't really see any signs or underground parking entrances. Do you perhaps have a photo or something to show the situation?

Hello,

Could you clarify what exactly has changed here? Is the building demolished and parking built in its place?