It has in fact not even started construction yet almost everywhere.

For major changes like this, in the future please provide a clear change summary.

Es personīgi lieku kā punktus, jā. Neesmu (līdz šim) nekad sastapies ar citādiem variantiem. Vienīgais ir tas, ko minēju par tegiem uz ceļa, bet tādu gandrīz nav Latvijā (https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Qcg) un tas baigais darbs tik sīki likt.

Njā, wiki patukšs. Principā traffic_calming=* viss info, bet tur tiešām nekas nav īsti labi aprakstīts ar piemēriem, kur tieši kas jāliek. Minēts īsumā gan ir: "Add one of the following tags to a highway way, or a highway node where the device is placed."

Čau,

Cik zinu šādi way/1286227212 mierinājumus navigatori un kartes nesapratīs, jo tas nesavienojas ar ceļu. Un kā līnija mierinājumi var būt, ja tas ir kā papildtegs uz paša ceļa (pēc principa kā `tactile_paving` u.c.). Un, cik zinu, kā līnijas tos liek tikai gariem gabaliem kā `traffic_calming=rumble_strip` vai `traffic_calming=island` (kas nav atsevišķi iezīmētas).

Čau!

Par dzelzceļa taku krustošanos ārpus izbūvētām vietām - tie nav apzīmējami ar `crossing`, jo Latvijā tie ir neatļauti (kaut arī praktiski visi tos lieto) - sliedes ir atļauts šķērsot tikai tam speciāli paredzētās vietās. `informal=yes` var atstāt, bet priekš maršrutēšanas tie būtu jānorāda kā `crossing=no`.

(Teorētiski, strikti pēc OSM principiem, te vispār būtu jāliek legāli `access=no` uz krustošanās vietas un paša ceļa, bet tā kā tie ir ikdienā lietoti, tad lai paliek bez "pilna aizlieguma". Bet `foot=yes` noteikti nē, jo tas paredz, ka ar kājām neierobežoti publiski atļauts.)

Čau,

Vai šeit zem ceļa tiešām nav caurteka? node/12127961288 Izskatās plats un rietumu pusē tāda tipiska caurtekas ēna. Arī pēc LIDAR es te visticamāk būtu minējis caurteku.

Čau,

No changeset/155543360 paskatījos, kas te apkārt.

Ja node/12121831160 ir tas koka stabs, kas Mapillary redzams, vai tas nebūs drīzāk `information=route_marker`? Vai arī tur kaut kas cits tagad?

Un cik es zinu ielu nosaukumu zīmēm (bez citu vietu norādēm) vispār tegu nav, bet tie gan arī nebūs guidepost, jo citādi uz katra stūra būs pa vienam vai vairākiem un tad vairs "reālus" tūrisma guidepostus nevarēs atrast.

Hi!

Just wanted to ask - is the 20 speed limit around way/123249279 by chance from living zone signage? Or is it just regular 20 speed limit (or zone) signs?

Thanks

Hello,

I had to undo this edit because it broke a bunch of road geometries. I'm not sure what you were trying to change, so can you please clarify or take a look again.

Paths are not removed on OSM because they aren't visible for a season when overgrown. Use `trail_visibility` to specify if it's not easily spotted. Yes, it's bad and not smooth and it overgrows, but it exists and is used. The other path floods, so this is the only alternative during spring melting or heavy rainfall.

Hello,

Please do not set access values to `no` for modes of transport that are not forbidden legally or otherwise, for example by some sort of signage. Bicycles are allowed on this path. See access=* for what the access keys mean on OSM. By setting this to `no` you are breaking routing.

Whether or not you consider this path bikeable is subjective, which is what `surface` and `smoothness` tags are for. You can also use `mtb:scale` and `sac_scale` to estimate path's difficulty.

Thanks

Oh, whoops, nevermind, I just noticed the other note note/4376042 since I was only looking at the one about parking. I wonder what happened to it - it seems like a new installation.

Hey,

You removed this court here way/1253016067/history - just wanted to double-check - is it not here anymore? Did it get moved?

Hi!

Could you please clarify what you mean to map with this gate way/1306927628 ? The geometry is currently overlapping the road and forming a weird shape.

Thanks

Tas bija būvēts sakarā ar Austrumu maģistrāles izbūvi kā apbraukšana, jo daudzas ielas bija ik pa laikam slēgtas un ierobežotas. Bez tā tur būtu ļoti tāla apbraukšana, kas pārpildītu visas ielas. Piemēram, Zemgala posms bija ilgstošu laiku slēgts https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=262533536746606&focus=photo un tas savienojums bija vienīgais veids kā nokļūt dienvidu virzienā (jo Vaidavas un Ieriķu ir vienvirziena).

Sveiki,

Šo izmaiņu atcēlu, jo šis savienojums vairs neeksistē. Iepriekš bija pareizi.

This also changed it for `shop=car_repair` and `shop=car_parts`, which is not only tyres.

Thanks, you're right, I think I did. There was a tiny overlap I didn't notice between two areas that I added into the multipolygon, which made it invalid. I think I fixed it.

I see, thanks for clarifying.

What you are looking at is parcel/plot/property information (Īpašuma nosaukums), but not address data. So using `addr:` tags would be incorrect, because that's not the address. (Also I should note that an automated bot in Latvia imports addresses, so these sort of points not in official data would get deleted). I am not aware of OSM having tags for such "raw" cadaster data.

OSM generally maps what is on the ground, so there usually should be something here to warrant naming it on a public map. Address points by themselves are the rare exception. As there are literally hundreds of thousands of plots in Latvia and many have property names, we don't really add their "names" by themselves because usually those names are only known to the owners and have no significance for the map. Unless the property is an isolated dwelling or has a proper address.

An example of address point might be: node/2073655064

There isn't any rule that this shouldn't be mapped but I feel that it's probably not the sort of information we would want to map. If you want to add many more of these, it's probably best to discuss it with the community first.

Cheers

Hello,

Could you please clarify what source you are using to change the motorway start location. The current extents are based on the on-the-ground signage. It may have recently changed, so could you confirm this?

Thanks

Hello,

Could you please clarify where these "cadastral objects" are? What sort of objects are you trying to add? `addr:cadastral_name` is not an OSM tag, so it's not clear. I also don't see these point in the regular cadaster data, so what source are you using?

Thanks