Hi Udarian, thank you for making the corrections and the nudge. That obviously has slipped my attention, but I’ll make sure to be more careful about affected alignments. Much appreciated, happy mapping to you too.

Hi aharvey, thank you for this and for letting me know. Happy mapping!

Hi PierZen, thank you for reaching out and for sharing your insights. Since the edits are resulting from a Maproulette challenge and other colleagues were also editing with me at the same time, we opted to edit only the building within the task scope to avoid any conflicts. I will follow your suggestions when I’m working individually. We’ll also explore other ways of coordination when we’re editing as a team.

Hi map per,
Thank you for the detailed explanation and for pointing out the implications of the current tagging. I understand your concerns.
I appreciate you clarifying that highway=motorway is an exception in this case. Your local knowledge is very valuable, and based on your explanation, I understand why restoring the previous tagging would provide a more consistent representation. I'm okay with reverting the classification to the previous state. Thank you for taking the time to explain the reasoning and helping improve the map.

Hi Udarian,
I overlooked the history and missed the turn restriction during my review. Thank you for your kind words and for pointing it out. I'll be more cautious in my future edits.

Hi Udar, thank you for reverting the changeset, and thank you for your explanation here. I’ll be more aware of cross-connectivity without entering the roundabout in my future edits.

Hi map per, thank you for your inquiry. I made these edits to maintain consistency in the highway classification across the interchange. And after reviewing the history of way/326826027, I now notice that its classification has changed multiple times between trunk and motorway over time.
highway=*#Usage states “Note that highway=* distinguishes roads by function and importance rather by their physical characteristic and legal classification. Usually these things are highly correlated, but OSM is not obligated to copy official road classifications.” So even though the motorway officially ends mid-section, it might also make sense to maintain the same classification on the entire section based on functionality.
Your local knowledge and explanation are much appreciated here, so I would appreciate your take and suggestion on this.

Hi Udarian,
Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.

Hi Udarian,
Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.

Hi Luis Camara, since Pike Nurseries was tagged as a building, I re-aligned the geometry to match the building feature. Its previous state was also causing building-highway intersection issues during validation. If you would suggest mapping the premises of Pike Nurseries, a landuse feature instead of a building feature would be more appropriate.

Hi Luis Camara,
Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.

Hi rskedgell, thank you for your time pointing this out to me. I noticed the roundabout sign and modified the geometry, overlooking that the center was traversable. I’ll be more careful with similar situations going forward.

Hi rskedgell,
Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.

Hi fortera_au,
Thank you for providing the feedback. I have made the corrections and removed the curve in the connecting road segment.

Hi fortera_au,
Thanks for this feedback and the reminder. I will take extra caution against outdated/old imagery sources. Changeset reverted to its previous state.

Hi Udarian,

Thanks for the feedback. I changed the classification back to it’s previous state in Changeset: 172003169.

Hi HairyCoo, Thank you for reaching out.

I have reassessed my edits to following your query and observed that the polygon earlier had area=yes and highway=residential tags, while the community guidelines suggest highway=residential tag should not be used on ares. Hence I opted to downgrade to highway=pedestrian, but I'm seeing that it's not the case either. I have made the corrections. Please feel free to reach out if you have any further questions.

Hi Sylabowy Kot, thank you for getting in touch via commenting on the changeset since I am, along with other members of the TomTom mapping team, directly notified that way.
Cross-checking your notes with TomTom proprietary data sources, I cannot confidently verify the addition of the construction tags on that section, since our sources suggest vehicular activity there.
I would recommend to keep the note open for a member of the local community to respond and verify. Alternatively, if you have local knowledge that confirms the section is under construction, you can go ahead and edit. The parking lot will remain accessible via the service road.

Hi fortera_au, Thank you for your observation. I created the missing way as there are painted markings visible in the latest Esri world imagery at -31.9532693, 115.9841392.  I also referred to recent TomTom propriatory traces at this location to support the way's existence here and westerly beyond the road markings I refer to.

Hi fortera_au,

Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.