Hi felipeeugenio,

Thank you for reaching out about this. We recently started mapping the buildings here and are working to outline them as best as possible. It can be difficult to determine the exact footprint for some buildings using only aerial imagery, but we will make sure to look for the internal spaces and exclude them.

Have a great day!

Correction: Source used was Bing aerial imagery, Mapillary

Hi Violaine_Do,

Thanks for your input regarding this footway. Since you have local knowledge here I can go ahead and add this segment back in. As for any other changes on footways or sidewalks, I do not remember any other specific examples or similar situations, as it has been several months since I reviewed this area.

Thanks,

Lars

Hello Violaine_Do,

When I came across this segment it looked to me like a minor anomaly in the data. It is a very small footway that juts out briefly before rejoining the footway it branched from (way/691327405), seemingly without leading to anything in particular. If you have insight as to what it might be used for and think it should be included in the data again, I would be happy to add it back, otherwise it appeared to serve no purpose and made for some awkward cartography.

Thank you,

Lars

Hello dblz, I hope you are doing well!
I noticed that ref tags have been removed from roundabouts in French Polynesia. It is my understanding that these junctions that “have ways either continuing through, or ending at the roundabout should have ref tagging if they are part of the route” (junction=roundabout#The_roundabout_itself). An example of this would be on the features at the roundabout (way/29433234) which would need “ref=RT 7; RT 2”. Based on this information, would you consider restoring the tags back for those road segments? I can also assist in these additions.
I look forward to hearing from you!

Traduction automatique
Bonjour dblz, j'espère que tu vas bien !
J'ai remarqué que les balises de référence ont été supprimées des ronds-points en Polynésie française. Je crois comprendre que ces carrefours qui « ont des voies qui continuent à travers le rond-point ou qui se terminent au rond-point devraient avoir des balises de référence si elles font partie de l'itinéraire » (junction=roundabout#The_roundabout_itself). Un exemple de cela serait sur les éléments du rond-point (way/29433234) qui auraient besoin de « ref=RT 7 ; RT 2 ». Sur la base de ces informations, envisageriez-vous de restaurer les balises pour ces segments de route ? Je peux également vous aider à effectuer ces ajouts.
J'ai hâte d'avoir de vos nouvelles !

Hello JJIglesias,

I see that you have been active in adding many of the ref tags on highways in Bolivia. In most cases, it also appears that you have been changing the classification of these highways to trunk when a ref tag is applied to them. Would you mind sharing what prompted these classification changes, as well as what resources you are using when making the edits? And is an official OSM policy in Bolivia to classify roads based solely on the ref tag?

While roads do not need to be paved or in the best condition to be classified as a trunk, I do believe that solely basing the importance of a highway from its ref can lead to inconsistent classification. For example, F37 (way/103104681 to way/310566588) is a narrow, unpaved road that leads through a few small villages and only serves as a connection to two other national refs on either side, which may not fit the definition of a trunk highway according to the Bolivia Road Classification wiki page (osm.wiki/ES:Bolivia/Clasificaci%C3%B3n_de_carreteras). This compares to F1 connecting El Alto/La Paz to Oruro (from way/120511149 to way/380457971) and continuing on to many other large cities, which is a multi-lane, paved dual carriageway. These highways share the same classification despite having very different levels of importance within the greater Bolivia highway network. This difference necessitates different classifications even though they both carry a national highway ref.

I would be happy to hear your thoughts on this and how you feel about some of these highways with national refs but lesser importance being changed to a lower classification. Happy mapping!

Hello 5m4u9, thanks again for your insight into this. The map you linked looks like a good reference, I will be sure to utilize it. Happy mapping!

Hello 5m4u9, thank you for your input on this ref. I made this edit because the entire stretch between Boyuibe and Ipati was included in the route relation for F6 (relation/5539621). It is quite common for refs to share the same stretch of road (in this case F6 and F9), therefore, I added the F6 ref tag on the ways here to match the route relation. Do you happen to have a resource that mentions the F6 ref terminating in Ipati and then resuming at Boyuibe before continuing east? I would be interested in any additional information you have on this area. Thanks again and I look forward to hearing back from you!

Thanks for looking into this, Layft Greater. Happy mapping!

Hello Layft Greater, I noticed that you removed some ref tags from roundabout ways in Cyprus (example: way/1150578087). I was curious as to why you decided to remove these tags from the segments.

According to the OSM Wiki (junction=roundabout#The_roundabout_itself), it mentions "For roundabouts that have ways either continuing through, or ending at the roundabout, ref=* and int_ref=* tags from those ways should be added to that roundabout if roundabout is also part of that routes.” Thanks and I look forward to hearing from you!

Hello Cláudio Medeiros, Kerguelen2 is no longer on the team so I will be handling this on their behalf. It looks like they removed the building=yes tag from the amenity polygon ( way/552907735 ) and added a new polygon for the actual building. We do not have the public resources available to confirm that the Justiça Federal is no longer here, but thank you for letting us know. Please feel free to make the necessary changes if you have local knowledge of this area. Happy mapping!

Tradução automática:

Olá Cláudio Medeiros, Kerguelen2 não está mais na equipe, então estarei cuidando disso em seu nome. Parece que eles removeram a tag building=yes do polígono de comodidade ( way/552907735 ) e adicionaram um novo polígono para o edifício real. Não temos recursos públicos disponíveis para confirmar que a Justiça Federal não está mais aqui, mas obrigado por nos avisar. Sinta-se à vontade para fazer as alterações necessárias se tiver conhecimento local sobre esta área. Feliz mapeamento!

Hi pera210, I noticed that you changed the ref tag on way/76641116 down to way/241795724 to “ref=24”. This is a fairly significant change so could you please provide the source for this? Thank you!

Hello again rarad74,
I see that after initially reverting my changeset (changeset/131947027) you remapped the area similar to how I had initially mapped it with the addition of tags confirmed from ground survey. It looks great now, and thank you for updating this. There is a section of the OSM Wiki (osm.wiki/How_We_Map) that mentions how OSM values local knowledge highly, but that mappers should welcome edits from outsiders. In this case I was able to add a couple missing road segments, and then you added some of the tags you mentioned after confirming with local knowledge. We are all trying to work together here to make the best map possible.
Our team aims to follow community guidelines when mapping: Is there a consensus in the Romanian community requiring those additional tags you mentioned when updating or adding road geometry? If there is, it would be nice if it could be documented on the OSM wiki so that other users know about this requirement. Thanks again,
Lars_TheViking

Hello rarad74,
Thank you for your input on these roads and for adding additional tags. For this link segment, I created the missing road from updated aerial imagery but we will refrain from adding additional tags without definitive evidence from available resources so as not to add any inaccurate data. Do you know if there is an official policy in Romania for adding multiple extra tags on every road segment? I do not see it mentioned in the OSM Wiki page for Romania: osm.wiki/WikiProject_Romania

Yes, I can do that. Thanks!

Hi again foreigner037, I think your perspective makes sense and your proposed tagging method is a good idea. Ideally we could have this documented in the OSM community for Bulgaria if there are numerous examples of partially finished projects that haven't seen construction for a long time. Based on this tagging proposal, since the A 3 motorway between way/692493755 and way/1086791232 appears to be under current construction, would you be open to tagging this back as highway=construction and construction=motorway to keep it consistent? Thank you again for your input on this!

Hi foreigner037, thank you for your thoughtful and detailed response. This policy is one of those that is certainly up for interpretation, so I can understand your point of view. The combination of the tags `highway=construction` and `construction=*` will block routing on its own, without `access=no` being necessary, according to global construction modeling policy (highway=construction). The only mention of `access` tags on this page is in reference to removing them upon completion of construction. So even though portions of the highway may have completed construction, best practice is normally to leave the construction tag present until the highway is open for traffic. However, our team does follow local, established editing practices, so if there is consensus among the local Bulgarian community regarding construction modeling, would your community be willing to document this somewhere for reference? Your input is appreciated!

Hi foreigner037, thanks for mapping! I noticed on these roads, way/1109758710 and way/163926583 that you have been removing “highway=construction” tags and replacing them with “highway=*” tags. I see you have been leaving “access=no” tags on these unopened highways, but as I understand global OSM policy for construction highway=construction, segments such as this should remain as “highway=construction” until the highways are fully finished and open to the public. For example, way/695793995 is correctly modeled with “highway=construction” and “construction=motorway” tags, but at low zoom levels, the surrounding highways give the misleading impression that these highways are open (osm.org/#map=14/41.9441/23.1032). Is there a reason why you are removing construction tags before the highways are open to traffic?

Thanks, and looking forward to your response.

Hi Kovoschiz, thanks for your input here. What I was going for was avoiding having a barrier tag along the residential loop way, but I can see why it could be considered incomplete. Having a barrier on a node along the residential way would indicate that vehicles cannot pass through the barrier. Also, rather than a barrier=kerb way overlapping the residential way, it might be more accurate to have the barrier=kerb way be offset from the road a little bit similar to this way: way/776240912.

I have an idea of how we could model this entire cul-de-sac area so that these features aren’t clashing with each other, and I would be more than willing to have you revise it if you disagree with any part of it. Let me know what you think!

Oi mazinhobender, obrigado pelo mapeamento! Percebi aqui que você fez algumas edições de reclassificação de primary para tertiary_link e residential.

Olhando para a política de OSM highway link (osm.wiki/Highway_link), a maioria dos tertiary links em torno de way/944867683 não se enquadram nas definições de links. Existe uma política de classificação local da qual devemos estar cientes que explicaria por que os caminhos que fazem parte dessas circular junctions devem ter classificações de link em vez de classificações de não link?

O segundo critério para classificação primary no Brasil diz “Via urbana pavimentada ligando rodovias primary entre si ou com rodovias de nível superior” (osm.wiki/Brazil/Classificação_das_rodovias_do_Brasil). Seguindo esta política de classificação do Brasil, formas incluindo way/688751106, way/157803626 e as circular junctions mencionadas anteriormente podem ser melhores como classificação primary.

Obrigado e feliz mapeamento!