Hi Skyper,
I have not added service=* tag as there is no enough resource on the type of entity to provide the detailed tag. I have now added the tag based on your feedback (changeset: 106015570). Also, I See that Maps4BW is useful in identifying the major roads and the type of area with the building outlines and numbers. However, the vintage of the same is unclear hence becomes ambiguous to utilize it in all the scenarios. I have forwarded the information on the same to my supervisors to explore further in utilizing this in our workflow. Thanks for the information.

Regards,
chaubean

Hi Skyper,

Thanks for your response. If we are clear with the information available, we do add access information. But if we are not sure of the inputs, we don't add access information. The editing philosophy we follow is to only add the information that is clearly visible. In this particular case, I was not completely sure if I should add access=private or access=permissive, hence I have limited myself to just add the missing road. But since you confirmed it with your local knowledge I am adding access=permissive tag to the road segment. Kindly refer to the changeset (105786352). Also, we don't add lanes, lit and surface information to roads currently.

I am not sure, why the response is looking the same. I believe since the context of your comment is the same, the response might have been in the same format. Will check with my supervisor for inputs on this.

Regards,
chaubean

Thanks for the inputs and sharing the forum discussions with us. I have gone through the complete discussion and am totally inlined with the suggestions proposed. The only challenge I foresee is this information is not completely captured in the OSM editing wiki pages. In the past we had a couple of challenges for adopting to a community members suggestions where other community members dis-agreed with it. Hence we were sticking to only the inputs shared in OSM wiki’s and not from forum discussions.

Also, there was a suggestion from the community in the past not to add any information without a proof from the ground. As per delivery partners feedback and satellite imagery we were able to identify the missing road in this particular case, but the additional information is not present in OSM to add access related tags. Hence we just limited ourselves to adding missing road. In case we had the ground information or a proof we do add additional information (Ex: changeset/104019071).

Also, please do share your inputs or suggestions on how to identify different information's that can be added to roads from the satellite images itself. I would be happy to learn it from your experience and implement it in my daily mapping.

Thanks for checking into our edits. Apologies for the inconsistency. We do not have the complete evidence to add the directions. Please find the changeset/96066528 for the reversion. I will take this as a learning from the community and make sure to implement in my future edits. Thanks for the valuable suggestions. Always happy to learn from the community

Thanks for checking into our edits. apologies, i have misinterpreted the road classification and added a track road. Please find the changeset #95809040 for the reversion. I do not have enough resources to predict the road classification of the adjoining roads. Please go ahead and make the necessary changes as per the local knowledge. Thanks for the suggestions. Always happy to learn from the community.

Thanks for checking into our edits. It is good to see the community improvising our edits, I will take this as a learning from the community and make sure to implement in my future edits. always happy to learn from the community

Thanks for checking into our edits. Apologies, I have misinterpreted the imagery and added the road. Thanks for the quick correction. I will make sure to cross verify all the imagery before adding the roads. Once again, thanks for the correction, always happy to learn from the community.

Thanks for the response. Please find the changeset(87269919) for the suggested modifications. We always thrive to improve the osm data with our best efforts. It is helpful that the community is improvising our edits with the local knowledge. I have forwarded your inputs to our management. Once again, thanks for your time for providing the valuable feedback. Always happy to learn from the community.

Thanks for checking into our edits. Apologies for the delayed response. I have created a service road and haven't modified the access/highway tags since we don’t have the enough resources to predict the type of building. So, i haven't added any customers/private tags as we are not sure of making the edits without proper ground data validating it. Once again thanks for your valuable inputs. Always happy to learn form the community.

Hi ndm,

Thanks for looking into my edit and for making the necessary changes. It was an honest mistake. Will take the suggestion as learning and use for the further edits.Please let me know if any changes are to be made.Always happy to learn from community.
Regards,
chaubean.