Hello,

Please don't draw building parts as multiple separate buildings, such as way/1529531795 . If you want to specify individual building parts, then these need to be additional ways with building:part=*.

Hello,

You added 20 zone here way/38915556, but the street imagery shows a living zone sign. Is this really a 20 zone now and not living zone anymore?

Jau iepriekš jautāts par šo posmu changeset/183460788 - ko šeit nozīmē cyclestreet=yes? Lūdzu paskaidrot šādas nestandarta izmaiņas.

Hello,

Please do not add incorrect access values to OSM. These are for legal/permitted access. The only time it is legally `bicycle=no` is if there is a sign or traffic law that forbids it. OSM does not map subjective values like "safe" because everyone interprets them differently and you cannot determine this objectively and verifiably. Road properties are specified by classification, lanes, width, max speed, surface, etc.

osm.wiki/Verifiability#Subjective_opinions

And please don't add horse=unknown - this value is similarly the same across the whole country and it's horse=yes unless otherwise specified. There is no point adding `unknown` unless you are trying to deliberately signal that this needs a survey to confirm the actual restriction, if any. And there are only a handful horse-related signs in the whole of Latvia, so it will almost never be applicable.

Please do not change living zone streets into other road types. You have broken classification here and removed living zone attributes. And service roads are not driveways when they are public connecting branching roads through public courtyards. Driveways are meant for final destination roads to individual properties that should not be routed otherwise. And then you left other roads and random segments not retagged at all, creating invalid and inconsistent road network. Your changeset comment does not explain what exactly you are doing and based on what sources and "wrong tags" is simply false here. And then there are a bunch of paths and footways that you mistagged. Almost everything here was correctly tagged. Please do not mass retag like this.

Ņem vērā, ka LĢIA pārskata karte norāda pārsvarā ēku paredzēto izmantošanu/uzbūvi (no kadastra/ēku datiem) nevis faktisko. Šie dati var būt gan nepareizi gan novecojuši. Tos var izmantot piemēram noteikt vai tā ir daudzdzīvokļu ēka. Bet no tā nevar noteikt vai tur ir faktiski aktīva mācību iestāde. Citiem vārdiem, tur ir tikai dati par `building=school` vai `building=preschool`, bet ne par `amenity=*`.

Un nosaukumus nevajadzētu likt, ja tie nav no avota. Piemēram, tāds termins "bērnudārzs" Latvijā vispār nepastāv vairs.

Šajā gadījumā izskatās, ka neviena no šīm iestādēm šeit vairs nav.

Hello,

Thanks for you edits. Just wanted to let you know that it's not needed to specify access values such as foot, motor vehicle, horse, etc. unless they are specifically forbidden or designated. On almost all streets, there are no special rules like that.

The editor or OSM does not resolve anything by default. The only way a ford is added is if you click the issue validator option to add it. The editor cannot know if it's a ford, a culvert, a bridge or a gap. Regardless, it is your responsibility to add the correct option and only if you know what it is.

Lūdzu izlabot šīs vērtības, jo pašlaik navigācijā turpu-šurpu mainās ātruma apzīmējumi.

Varētu lūdzu precizēt, kā tieši izpaužās bicycle_road=yes? Kādas zīmes šeit ir uzstādītas? Latvijā tādu terminu CSN nav, bet OSM tas tad nozīmētu, ka šeit ar mehānisko transportu vispār nedrīkst un jāliek attiecīgi access tegi.

Sveiki,

Vai šeit ir jauna zīme uzstādīta? Kā tieši ir "atļauta" kustība abos virzienos? Iepriekš šeit bija tikai 301. zīme.

Hello,

I wanted to clarify what did you intend to map when adding multiple bicycle parking nodes right next to each other? You have currently mapped 72 bike racks/stands - 9 parking locations with 8 stands each. Did you mean to map individual racks here? Normally, only one node for parking is mapped (it can be an area for larger locations).

You set it as grade4 compacted track before. And now you are saying it's barely driveable and overgrown in places. Last time I was here, it was driveable fine. I cannot imagine it overgrowing in 2 years that much. Which parts are overgrown? Do you have photos or something to show it?

May be it can be set to track from V7 to Dravenieki. But not the section until farmyard access. Service roads are also never this long when they connect between other roads/tracks. It's almost always either unclassified or track.

As far as "not a public hiking trail" - this route is published by the official Tukums tourism board: https://www.visittukums.lv/lv/Marsruti/Pargajienu-marsruti/Milzkalna-un-Raudas-apkartne . Their provided GPX mostly matches the mapped relation.

Did the complainant say it's specifically OSM that leads them here?

That said, it does look like it goes through some private properties like way/299858668 and it really shouldn't.

Most of the land and parcels here seem to be be forest tracks and servitude roads. So it would indeed be worth clarifying what the complainant considers "significant part .. through private land and private road infrastructure". Most of this does not look private in the sense that it "creates a practical trespass and safety issue".

So I guess to resolve this. Clarify from complainant which ways they mean. Retag private ways on OSM as private. Contact tourism board and ask to fix the route.

As a general comment, a lot of routes in Latvia are haphazard like this and often go through private land sections and even completely removed roads. There isn't anything like "right of way". Land owners can just block roads and refuse access unless there is an established servitude road status, which is a complicated legal process. Normally, we might exercise some common sense and reroute ways to be more sensible, but I don't really see any way to do this here like around that example driveway.

Jau iepriekš minēts, atsevišķām pārejām ap saliņu kā node/13893701373 netiek atzīmēts vēlreiz crossing:island=yes - šeit datos tagad 3 saliņas vienā vietā. Lūdzu izlabot.

Lūdzu nākotnē veikt šādas individuālu projektu izmaiņas pa vienai. Nevajag uz katra ceļa gabala norādīt `source`, bet iezīmēt no viena avota vienā izmaiņā un norādīt avotu visai izmaiņai, lai to var apspriest individuāli. Vēlāk šos source neviens nenoņems un paliks gadiem pa visiem elementiem. Arī ne visi šeit norādīti avoti var būt pieņemami kartei, ja tie nav ne apstiprināti ne pat pabeigti, bet tikai kaut kādā idejas stadijā. Šādus "projektus" OSM nezīmē. Piemēram ceļi gar Piņķiem izskatās kā aptuveni piemēri demonstrācijai bez nekādiem konkrētiem plāniem un OSM tie diez vai ir jāzīmē.

Šajā izmaiņā daudzās vietās ir izlaisti ceļa posmi mainot tegus. Lūdzu izlabot visus posmus, lai nav pa vidu atstāti ceļa gabali ar dažādām vecajām vērtībām piemēram way/1117233131.

Jau iepriekš minēts, ka joslas atsevišķi nezīmē, ja tās nav fiziski nodalītas.

Hello, you changed a lot of roads to be called "Vītolu iela" from their original names, probably as a copy-paste error. Please be more careful.

Hi,

Just to let you know `access=permit` on OSM means that anyone from public can acquire such a permit. In other words, military areas and most private locations are never `permit` but `private` or `no`.