Hi, can you please provide a reason for deleting the node for El Poblado? The changeset comment has nothing to do with the content of the changeset. If the deletion was in error, please revert your changes. Thanks.

Hi, I've removed tags making reference to Carrera 45 on Autopista Norte north of the city limits as the nomenclature is only applicable within city limits.

I've never come across signs with that abbreviation that I can remember, but no one is stopping you from using short_name for this. Just make sure to document that it is signed that way by adding a note tag. I don't necessarily agree that it's a good idea for the reasons explained above, and someone might get the idea that it's missing in all other roads when they don't see it applied, so documenting that it's applied in this case because it's actually signed as such on the ground is key. Using the ref tag is an error and seeing as it is often misused to map for the rendered is liable to get deleted (unless the usage is properly documented, which it wasn't in this case)

Hi Federico, I'm not exactly sure what you meant with your note "map better", but as users don't get notifications about such notes, I would suggest leaving either a changeset comment such as this one, or contacting the author directly through a message in OSM might be more effective. Alternatively, a fixme tag and a highway=road tag might also be more successful at getting someone's attention, as they usually come up in data quality tools. In any case, what was mapped was according to information available at the time and with the tools and low resolution imagery which was available at the time. Can it be improved? Of course! The map is never complete (osm.wiki/Completeness#The_map_is_never_complete) so it's more useful when we ask how it can be improved in specific ways rather than simply saying that it's wrong or incomplete, because it always is, by definition. So, specifically, the secondary road from Junin/National Hwy 10 to Barbacoas can be aligned to the newer imagery available from Bing. Secondly, there is a visible road from across the river at Barbacoas northward towards Magüí. Lastly, the westward segment between Magüßí and Paloseco doesn't seem to exist, though there is a forest cutting visible just to the east of the current trace. Someone would need to make an on-the-ground observation for that segment. Feel free to get in touch with any questions :) Happy mapping!

Hello, there was no high resolution imagery available at the time the way was created, thus the rough alignment. Regarding the northern part (i.e. north of Barbacoas), if you're referring to the weird highway=pendiente tag, I was not the author: I had added it as highway=unclassified but it was changed in changeset/41894893. There is definitely a road visible on the new BIng imagery, at least up to Magüí in the north. There seems to be no road west from Magüí to Paloseco (node/703481189). Unfortunately I don't have time at the moment to align the roughly aligned secondary road to the newer imagery. I will add a fixmetag and perhaps someone will get to it eventually, or I will come back to it when time permits. Cheers

No, for two reasons: there are several common abbreviation schemas in use at this locale with all being equally valid possibilities. Secondly, both AK and K would be valid short names for this road within that particular abbreviation schema. Short name is not for things like Avenue or Boulevard; a renderer wishing to show abbreviated names should use its own list of abbreviations for common words. I don't understand the point about addr:street (?)

Thanks for the heads-up. changeset/52706233 fixes all instances of the tag Overpass could find. Cheers.

I never heard back and the deleted relations were never restored, despite newer changesets by your user account. I have gone ahead and restored the relation for National Highway 25 in question for this changeset. In the process, I also noticed that all previous segments for that relation were deleted and recreated, resulting in the loss off all history for those ways. In addition to being more careful with deleting relations (especially those pertaining to national level road networks), I would like to ask that you be more considerate of other's work and the time it takes for them to revert (see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_remove_tags_that_you_don.27t_understand), to edit instead of delete existing objects so as to preserve their history whenever possible (see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history). Lastly, please enter more descriptive changeset comments as explained in osm.wiki/Good_practice#Good_changeset_comments. I don't know if you didn't revert your changes out of a lack of willingness, or simply because you didn't know how to. If the latter, please feel free to reach out to me or the community in the future with any questions so that we may work together to better the map (this is a community endeavor after all), especially in Colombia, which can do with a lot of quality improvement. In any case, thanks for your contributions to the map.

Hi, please note that the segments crossing over the Turnpike (or any controlled-access highway for that matter) are not motorway_links but rather service ways available *only* to emergency vehicles or police. They should be tagged with highway=service, access=no, emergency=yes. Leaving the access tag out will make it come up as an error in QA. Thanks.

See http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/s93

Marco, this is still not fully reverted...

Hi, regarding the cross-over segments on I-75 which you and other Mapbox mappers are adding, please note that access=permissive is not correct for these segments. They are signed "emergency vehicles only" which goes against the definition of permissive, which implies that access has been granted (even if on a temporary or ad hoc basis) to the general public by the owner, so that tagging is incorrect and will lead routing software to use these segments for navigation. Drivers using these segments are liable to be fined. The appropriate tagging should be access=no (with emergency=yes if desired). Further, the access=no tagging precludes them being used by the general public, I don't see the need to split the highways unnecessarily in order to map U-turn restrictions. In the same way that "do not enter" signs aren't mapped when they are there to alert a vehicle traveling in the wrong direction. That leads to unnecessary fragmentation of ways and can break relations.

Hi there, I just reverted the addition of highway=service to the Doral admin boundary relation (relation/1216666), which I'm sure was added by accident. Would be great if you could review the changeset again, though, to check the specific are you were editing for errors. Thanks! :)

Hi, thanks for adding the turn restriction from NE 62nd St onto northbound NE 2nd Ave. Please note, however, that a turning lane is available, so this restriction breaks navigation as well as bus route 202 which turns left at that intersection. I've added the missing turning segment (since there is a divider) and fixed the bus relation. Thanks.

Seems weird that the changeset where I added the fixme to alert about the incorrect highway tagging for this feature would be flagged as bad in OSMCha. I wasn't the original authorl I actually fixed the bad tagging https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/99871682. Not sure how much bearing those votes have, but just wanted to clarify what had actually happened. Cheers

Ok, this is much worse than I thought. You seem to have edited ALL aerialways in the city and broken the public_transport schema for all stations, stops and platforms in the city. Kindly revert your changes completely. I encourage you to read up on the public transport schema (osm.wiki/Proposed_features/Public_Transport) and coordinate with the community *before* embarking on such widespread changes. Thanks in advance for your prompt attention.

Also, please add more detailed comments to your changesets. "Details" is not specific enough.

Hi, this changeset breaks public transport relations for Metrocable. What was the reason for the edits? Please revert your changes or fix the public transport features. Thanks.

that should read highway=service, of course :-)

Hi there, please note that the segments crossing over the Turnpike are not motorway_links but rather service ways available *only* to emergency vehicles or police. They should be tagged with highway=server, access=no, emergency=yes. Leaving the access tag out will make it come up as an error in QA tools like keepright if I remember correctly. The no_u_turn relation therefore seems superfluous and only leads to unnecessary segmentation of the highway imho. Cheers