Hey felipeeugenio,

Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately, I don’t have the resources to confirm if these are palm trees but if you know they are in fact palm trees, feel free to tag them.

I appreciate you reaching out!

Hi felipeeugenio, thank you for reaching out.
I added these natural=tree features referencing aerial and ground imagery resources. After uploading, I noticed that I accidentally copied the tags from a nearby tree with specific tagging such as species, genus, leaf_cycle, leaf_type, and height. These extra tags are difficult to fully confirm in resources on the trees I added, so I decided to remove them and only leave the general natural=tree tag. If you or other local mappers have knowledge on the specifics of these trees, please feel free to add them! It would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks, cartogravy

Traducción automática
Olá Erick Araújo,
Obrigado por entrar em contato sobre esta área. Adicionei tags de acesso porque a entrada para esta área parece estar bloqueada no Mapillary (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&lat=-22.807218551636&lng=-43.254512786865&z=17&pKey=508731113502297). Adiarei seu conhecimento se você acreditar que isso é impreciso.
Atenciosamente,
cartogravy

Hi Erick Araujo,
Thank you for reaching out about this area. I added access tags because the entrance to this area appears to be gated in Mapillary (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&lat=-22.807218551636&lng=-43.254512786865&z=17&pKey=508731113502297). I will defer to your knowledge if you believe this is inaccurate.
Best regards,
cartogravy

Hi Violaine_Do,
Thanks for providing that offset, I’ll review the area and update where I see there are issues.
Best regards,
cartogravy

Traducción automática
Hola Santanaloba53,

Noté que había una carretera principal creada desde way/713538656 hasta way/48581629. Sin embargo, aquí en materia de recursos no parece haber un camino completado. Además, la carretera principal way/48581627, autopista Pedernales, ya existe y parece seguir siendo la ruta principal que actualmente se puede utilizar. Con eso en mente, revertí este conjunto de cambios ya que había muchos errores de validación y características superpuestas en los datos. La wiki de validaciones de OSM osm.wiki/JOSM/Validator#Validations proporciona información sobre cómo verificar vías cruzadas para garantizar que las vías en la misma capa no se superpongan incorrectamente. Estas validaciones de cruces de carreteras deben verificarse con recursos para garantizar un mapeo preciso de las carreteras.

Las características de construcción que no son caminos activos se etiquetan mejor como construcción hasta que estén completamente abiertas para no confundir a los usuarios de OSM sobre qué caminos son transitables. El etiquetado propuesto podría usarse para cualquier camino planificado que aún no haya comenzado a construirse, lo que archiva el uso futuro sin confundir los caminos abiertos con los caminos planificados. La construcción y las secciones propuestas de la página wiki de Carreteras (osm.wiki/Highways#Roads_under_construction_and_proposed_roads) y la página wiki de Construcción (construction=*) tienen detalles sobre cómo mapear el etiquetado de construcción para tener coherencia entre todos los usuarios en OSM.

Gracias y que tengas un buen día.
cartogravy

Hi Santanaloba53,

I noticed there was a trunk road created from way/713538656 to way/48581629. However, there does not seem to be a completed road here in resources. Additionally, the primary road way/48581627, autopista Pedernales, already exists and appears to still be the main route that is currently useable. With that in mind, I reverted this changeset as there were many validation errors and overlapping features in the data. The OSM validations wiki osm.wiki/JOSM/Validator#Validations provides information on checking for crossing ways to ensure ways on the same layer are not overlapping incorrectly. These highway crossing validations should be verified with resources to ensure accurate highway mapping.

Construction features that are not active roads are better tagged as construction until they are fully open so as to not confuse OSM users which roads are drivable. Proposed tagging could be used for any planned road that has not begun construction yet, which archives the future use without confusing open roads from planned roads. The construction and proposed sections of Highways wiki page (osm.wiki/Highways#Roads_under_construction_and_proposed_roads) and the Construction wiki page (construction=*) have details on how to map construction tagging in order to have consistency between all users in OSM.

Thanks and have a good day.
cartogravy

Hola Santanaloba53,

Noté que eliminaste las etiquetas de construcción en grandes secciones de carreteras (como way/1105283744). Estos artículos recientes en línea; https://www.diariolibre.com/economia/turismo/2024/01/04/abinader-inaugura-primera-fase-del-puerto-cabo-rojo-en-pedernales/2567495 y https://dominicantoday.com/dr/turismo/2023/06/12/gobierno-construirá-carretera-para-promover-circuitos-turísticos-en-pedernales/; hable sobre el reciente comienzo de las obras viales y la finalización de estos proyectos de construcción que no ocurrirán en 2024. Esto coincide con los recursos de OSM, incluidos Bing Aerial Imagery y Esri World Imagery, que muestran que las carreteras no están en condiciones para ser transitadas y abiertas al público. uso actualmente.

También en changeset/147375141 agregaste way/1249565444 como una nueva autopista. Su presencia como tramo abierto de autopista no está respaldada por ningún recurso ni confirmada en comunicados de prensa sobre mejora de carreteras.

La política de construcción de carreteras de OSM highway=construction establece que si una carretera está actualmente en construcción, necesita etiquetas highway=construction y su clasificación futura se puede indicar con Construction=[Road Clase] etiqueta. Esto sería coherente con el etiquetado de construcción que agregó en way/1245673741 para proyectos de construcción que, según los recursos, aún no están completos.

¡Gracias y espero tener noticias tuyas!
cartogravy
Traducción automática

Hi Santanaloba53,

I noticed that you removed construction tagging on large sections of highways (such as way/1105283744). These recent online articles; https://www.diariolibre.com/economia/turismo/2024/01/04/abinader-inaugura-primera-fase-del-puerto-cabo-rojo-en-pedernales/2567495 and https://dominicantoday.com/dr/tourism/2023/06/12/government-will-build-a-road-to-promote-tourist-circuits-in-pedernales/; talk about the recent beginning of the road work and the completion of these construction projects not occurring in 2024. This matches OSM resources including Bing Aerial Imagery and Esri World Imagery that show the highways are not in a state to be driven on and open to public use currently.

Also in changeset/147375141 that you added way/1249565444 as a new motorway. Its presence as an open motorway section is not supported by any resources or confirmed in road improvement news releases either.

OSM highway construction policy highway=construction states that if a highway is currently under construction, it needs highway=construction tags and its future classification can be denoted with the construction=[Road Class] tag. This would be consistent with the construction tagging you added at way/1245673741 for construction projects that resources show are not yet complete.

Thanks and I look forward to hearing from you!
cartogravy

Saludos Santanaloba53,

He notado aquí que cambiaste way/713538656 de una carretera principal/primary highway a una autopista (motorway). En el futuro, si que podría convertirse en una autopista con mejoras carreteras y cruces, pero actualmente las intersecciones a nivel con caminos/vías menores no coinciden con la definición de acceso restringido de una autopista (osm.wiki/Tag:highway =autopista).
También en este conjunto de cambios, agregaste la etiqueta ‘source=google map’ que es incompatible con las reglas de código abierto que “prohíben explícitamente el uso de contenido de Google Maps, tanto datos de mapas como Google Street View, para crear cualquier tipo de contenido. Esto incluye usándolo para el mapeo de OSM” (osm.wiki/Google). Si es el caso que fue un error, es necesario quitar la etiqueta. Si la fuente de este cambio si fue Google Maps, entonces es probable que todo el conjunto de cambios sea necesario revolverlo a la versión anterior.

Cordialmente,
cartogravy

Hi Santanaloba53,

I noticed here that you changed way/713538656 from a primary to a motorway. In the future, with road and junction improvements it may become a motorway but currently the at-grade intersections with minor roads does not match the restricted access definition of a motorway (highway=motorway).

In this changeset you also added the tag of 'source=google map' which is incompatible with the open source rules which "explicitly forbid using Google Maps content - both map data and Google Street View - for making any other content. It includes using them for OSM mapping” (osm.wiki/Google). If that was a mistake, the tag needs to be removed. If the source of this change was Google Maps, then entire changeset will likely need reverting to the previous version.

Best,
cartogravy

Hi Danielfv33, I hope you are well.

I noticed in changeset/135860757 and changeset/139485248 that many tertiary and residential highways were deleted or disconnected, including entire neighborhoods and main city roads. These highways still exist in all resources including Bing aerial imagery, Esri World Imagery, Mapbox and Strava GPS Traces. Is there a reason for the removal that occurred twice in the before mentioned changesets?

Many people use and rely on the data in OSM so removing data can cause a lot of issues for the map and various routers that utilize it. The deleting of features with a long history removes that important context that is useful for future edits, even if the characteristics of the road has changed over time. Retaining that history also retains the contributions of the mappers that have come before you.

If there was no compelling reason for the deletions, I can restore the roads to regain the history on these features. If you have additional changes that need to be made you can simply version those. I also encourage all newer mappers to visit osm.wiki/Main_Page & osm.wiki/Beginners%27_guide which has many useful resources for how to apply various tagging and formal modeling for common mapping in OpenStreetMap. Any specific local concerns can be raised on the Mexico’s Telegram channel (https://t.me/osm_mx).

Thank you and looking forward to your reply. Have a good day.

Hola Danielfv33, espero que estés bien.

Noté en changeset/135860757 y changeset/139485248 que se eliminaron o desconectaron muchas carreteras terciarias y residenciales, incluidos vecindarios enteros y calles principales de la ciudad. Estas autopistas todavía existen en todos los recursos, incluidas las imágenes aéreas de Bing, Esri World Imagery, Mapbox y Strava GPS Traces. ¿Hay alguna razón para la eliminación que ocurrió dos veces en los conjuntos de cambios mencionados anteriormente?

Muchas personas usan y confían en los datos de OSM, por lo que eliminar datos puede causar muchos problemas para el mapa y varios enrutadores que lo utilizan. La eliminación de entidades con un largo historial elimina ese contexto importante que es útil para ediciones futuras, incluso si las características de la carretera han cambiado con el tiempo. Retener esa historia también retiene las contribuciones de los mapeadores que lo precedieron.

Si no hubo una razón convincente para las eliminaciones, puedo restaurar las carreteras para recuperar el historial de estas características. Si tiene cambios adicionales que deben realizarse, simplemente puede versionarlos. También animo a todos los mapeadores más nuevos a visitar osm.wiki/Main_Page y osm.wiki/Beginners%27_guide, que tiene muchos recursos útiles sobre cómo aplicar varias etiquetas y modelado para mapeo común en OpenStreetMap. Cualquier inquietud local específica se puede plantear en el canal Telegram de México (https://t.me/osm_mx).

Gracias y espero su respuesta. Que tenga un buen día.

Esta es una traducción automática.

Hi kevintrap, I hope you are well.
I noticed in changeset/137569222 and changeset/137537672 that many service and residential highways were deleted south of Calzada Independencia, including entire neighborhoods and parking lots. These highways still exist by all resources (Maxar Premium Imagery, Esri World Imagery, Mapbox; Mapillary; Strava GPS Traces).

Many people rely on the data in OSM for a variety of uses. Removing data can cause a lot of issues for the map, various routers that utilize the data, and deleting features removes the history of the contributions with their unique tagging that is difficult to source like name tags. Additionally the highway=motorway tag is for highest-traffic-volume, restricted-access dual carriage corridors (highway=motorway), which was placed in an existing parking lot (way/1183721845). This data will need to be restored to what it originally was.

If you have additional changes, osm.wiki/Main_Page has many useful resources for how to apply various tagging for common mapping practices. Have a good day and happy mapping!

Hi ralvacr, I hope you are well.

I noticed in changeset/137570761 that you added motorways south of Calzada Independencia where parking lots accessing a building exist in all resources (Maxar Premium Imagery, Esri World Imagery, Mapbox; Mapillary).

The highway=motorway tag is for highest-traffic-volume, restricted-access dual carriage corridors (highway=motorway), which was placed in an existing parking lot (way/1183721845). The highway=service tag is used for parking lots that access a building, as shown in resources at this location. This data will need to be restored to what it originally was, with the parking lots modeled as highway=service (highway=service).

If you have additional changes, osm.wiki/Main_Page has many useful resources for how to apply various tagging for common mapping practices. Have a good day and happy mapping!

Thanks for taking a look! Sounds good, I am going to remove the footway tags.

Hi pizzaiolo,
I noticed in multiple changesets (changeset/27636025), (changeset/26959206), (changeset/27419236), that you added highway=footway and footway=sidewalk tags to addr:inclusion=potential and addr:interpolation=odd segments. I didn’t find an OSM wiki page that mentions using footway and addr: keys in conjunction with each other (addr=*). Additionally, sidewalks in the area run along existing vehicle navigable highways (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=330020648527980) so I am not sure they need their own unique geometry. The current modeling has created missing connections around intersections such as (node/2689151654) and those missing connections caused pedestrian routing issues. I wanted to see what you think. To me I think that the highway=footway and footway=sidewalk tags on these addr segments can be removed.
Thanks!
cartogravy