Sounds good! I have made the changes. Let me know if there is anything else I can help you with!

Okay I made the changes for the first part.

For the second one I would suppose my only input would be that when you turn you would 'enter' that road that is going to bring you to the motorway and that until you make that final turn onto the secondary you are still on that road that brought you from the motorway and because we would classify the one part to be a motorway_link that would carry through until its termination/generation.

Though I can understand your argument for it being secondary because it no longer has those restrictions that apply to motorway_links. Would you like me to make them Secondary links?

Okay for the 1st example you mentioned I definitely agree with you that it should be a secondary road because you are right that the merging of the tertiary changes the function of the road after it. I will make that change now. For the opposite side of the road would you also carry the primary straight through rather then having it change to a primary link? This is the link in question way/604643265

For your second example I understand what you mean by it being a secondary link. I think I made it a motorway link all the way across because I feel as though that is the same road just entering or exiting a junction. If you feel strongly that it should be a secondary_link I have no problem changing that back. Though I am a tad confused about your mention of being careful to merge due to turn restrictions. Did I miss a turn restriction at this junction? I usually try and watch out for those and make sure to add them whenever I can if I missed it I would like to go back and add that.

I would also agree with your assessment of the 3rd junction.

Finally, there are no harsh feeling here. I can relate to your frustration, these types of disagreements can be quite disrupting to a community! I took a look at the forums and I would think that your solution could be a great compromise! I hope that things work out soon. Let me know if there is anything else I can fix or help with!

My apologies ika-chan,
I was following the general guide lines in the Wiki.
osm.wiki/Highway_link
That states that links typically do not have names. From Mapillary imagery collected in October, I also was not able to see a name specifically for that link.
I apologize for deleting it if there was a signed name for that road. Thank you for correcting it.

Hi ika-chan,
Could you send me a link to the roads in particular? It has been awhile since I worked here and I would like to just refresh myself on which roads you mean. I am constantly trying to improve and would like to have your feedback.

Hi TXBG,
I saw that you changed this intersection way/677916806. When these changes were implemented, several relations became miss-aligned.
Can you help provide some clarity about the motivation behind these changes? It is most beneficial when map errors or tagging practices are addressed and discussed. In the future would you be willing to create a changeset comment or message me if there are any discrepancies with my edits? I would really like to work with you to help improve the map in Belgrade.

Hey Map-Finder,
I am looking at these intersections and I noticed you didn't connect two crossing ways. I fixed that. I am wondering why you didn't classify these as links though.
Thanks for your input!
Te-ika

Just wanted to confirm. Thanks for getting back on this so fast!

Hey Chachafish,

Could take a look at this area.
way/416358766
According to imagery taken around a month ago it would appear this parking lot has been built on to become an apartment building. If you could confirm that we can go ahead and make the necessary changes.

Thanks!
Te-Ika

Thank you, I have addressed the issue and repaired the data in that area.

Got it, thank you!

Thank you, got it taken care of!

Thank you I addressed it.

Okay thank you I was editing in JOSM and didn't notice the construction polygon.

Hey chachafish,
So I took a look at the area in question and found that the road had the tiger base name of "State highway 330." I changed the key from tiger to alt_name and removed the state. From there I also added a road that had the same name as the house addr:street tags that appeared to be along the road based on imagery. I believe those addresses to be accurate because I imported those in from local county GIS database with their permission. I am going to take another look at that database later on today but I am busy right now working on another project. Thanks for your feedback! Let me know if there is anything else I can help with.

Hey Oanac2, sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you on this I have been distracted with other things. Could you specify which intersection in question. I added several turn restrictions in this changeset and and I am not sure which one you are specifying.

Whoa I didn't know that the White house was in Orchard Mesa!

Gracias. No sé cómo incluí ese nodo en la restricción que es un error extraño.

Awesome just wanted to run that one by you thanks for taking a look at it!

Hey MrKrabs you added a oneway tag to San Pablo de Lago as it joins Panamericana Norte. But it comes directly out of a two way street could you please verify this segment.
way/405477656/history#map=19/-2.88276/-78.97206