Hi!

Could you please clarify what kind of way is way/997736168 ? You placed many legal access tags on it, so now it says that large (4-wheel) vehicles can pass here, but it's tagged only as a path. Is this perhaps a track or a road? It connects to a sports pitch and a footway, so it seems unlikely cars are allowed to travel here?

Thanks

P. S. I can reply in Latvian.

Protams, ka sekoju visu laiku! >.<

Haha, nē, bet tu jau visu laiku kaut ko labo. Es vienkārši OsmCha attaisīju un visas izmaiņas pēc kārtas sākot ar jaunāko. Tev šoreiz trāpījās viena no pēdējām.

Čau (vēlreiz),

Es skatos, ka tu pa laiku es sadalījis mežus no dzīvojamām teritorijām ap Ādažu Baltezeru. Piemēram relation/15104238

Tas nav gluži pareizi, jo tie nav "overlapping landuse". residential ir land use (kā teritoriju izmanto), bet wood/forest ir landcover (kāds ir fizisks pārklājums). Un tie var noteikti pārklāties. Piemēram, šeit visi šitie dzīvojamie rajoni pārklājas ar mežu.

Kā piemēru - tad jau arī viss Ādažu poligons ir landuse=military un ir overlapping ar visiem mežiem un pļavām un purviem. :)

Čau!

Ar way/553534541/history barrier direction gan nebūs pareizi. Labā puse barjerām ar pušu nozīmi ir "galvenā" puse, kas guard rail gadījumā ir "plakanā" puse - pret sadursmēm. iD trīsstūrīši "skatās" uz brauktuvi/mašīnām.

Note that this area now has both `highway=service` + `area=yes` AND `area:highway=yes`.

Hi again,

When a stream "crosses" a road, there usually is not both a bridge and culvert since those are different structures. A bridge holds/supports the road. A culvert is a tunnel in the ground under the road.

So way/1203869225 should either be road bridge or stream/ditch culvert. And these are most likely culverts.

Hi!

The `source` tag is not supposed to be used for Wikipedia links. There is a `wikipedia` tag specifically for those links. Furthermore, this Wikipedia link is for the article about the road itself, not its name. For the street name article and data, the `name:etymology` tags are used, and for Wikipedia it's `name:etymology:wikipedia`.

The tags here are already correctly set:
`name=Linarda Laicena iela`
`name:etymology=Linards Laicens`
`name:etymology:wikidata=Q4253229`
`name:etymology:wikipedia=lv:Linards Laicens`

name:etymology=*#How_to_map

Thanks

It depends on official maps, names and data. But the drain is most likely not called anything. The connection between the drain and Daugava just doesn't exist anymore, so there is no named stream there.

I don't live here exactly, but I have biked past here a bunch of few times in the past. I know there are ditches and streams here, although I didn't think any of them as large enough to count as streams. If the steam really connects all the way through this area, then is can probably be classified as a stream. There are a lot of ditches and streams that are not draw on the map yet.

Ok, sounds good!

I'll double-check and fix any issues later.

Is this stream underground in a pipe?

You can also switch the background layer to LIDAR to see how streams flow https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/#configuring-the-background-layer This can help drawing them (just note that the LIDAR is not exact).

Just a note that these footways need indoor tagging scheme rather than covered=yes or similar.

Hello again,

Similar to before, where is the name "Jugla ditch" from? This seems like a highly unlikely official name for a tiny ditch section.

Looks good, thanks!

Hello,

Unfortunately, this was not a valid fix for this detected issue. You cannot simply "extract" a part of the building to a different layer to avoid the error report. There isn't great Mapillary footage available here, but you can see this is a building passage through the same building https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=108548951312564&focus=photo And if you enable the cadaster layer, you can see it's the same building. These are extremely common in Latvia.

Please take care not to guess at the solution if you aren't sure and instead skip it or mark it as "too hard" in MapRoulette. A local may be able to fix it.

Thanks

As I mentioned in changeset/140536183, this minor ditch is almost certainly not a river, please don't change it to such classification.

You specified that way/1203094652 and further is a tunnel and a pipe - are you sure this is correct? This stream/ditch is visible of LIDAR layer and it doesn't look like it's some sort of underground pipe. If you could explain what you meant, I could fix it and set the right tags.

Hello!

Can I ask where the name "plavūpe" is from for way/1203087391?

This is also almost certainly not a river. It could be considered a stream, but it's most likely just a ditch. I'm not sure how you are measuring the width, but it's definitely not 5 meters wide water.

Also, tidal=yes shouldn't be specified on any water bodies so far from the coast - none of these are affected by the tides.

The geometry of way/1203090258 looks incorrect - it's drawn almost on top of the road but the road here is 2 lanes wide.

I fixed some other issues with waterway relations. Notably, there are no tributaries or springs here.

I'll leave some additional comments on some other of your changes.

Thanks

P. S. I can reply in Latvian or Russian if English isn't the best.

Sveiki!

Vai varētu lūdzu precizēt, kas tieši bija domāts ar šo izmaiņu? Cik zinu, šajā posmā nav divvirzienu kustība un sabiedriskais transports to lieto tikai austrumu-rietumu virzienā (no Tilta uz Tvaika vai Ganību, kā tas arī minēts LSM rakstā).

Paldies

reverted as vandalism

changeset/140358537