Hi,

When adding sidewalks, can you also make sure to add every crossings (marked and unmarked) please? Otherwise this break pedestrian router as they have no way to cross roads.

Thanks in advance.

Why is Rue de Sève marked as "use_sidewalk" for walk access if absolutely no sidewalks is mapped next to it?

Hi!

When changing access level in gated community, could you also be sure to change the access level of the different walk paths? Otherwise this create a weird state where it's illegal to access roads, but totally fine to walk on the walk paths for pedestrian planner.

Thanks a lot!

Hi,

When adding sidewalks, would it be possible to also add 'Unmarked crossing' ways at every corners where someone can cross the street? Otherwise, this create sidewalk islands for pedestrian router that relies on OSM data.

Thanks you and have a good day

Hi,

Why duplicating this cyclepath? The information is already contained in the way/176209977 (way/176209977). Notice its `cycleway:left|track` tags.

Please, either
(1) revert this change or
(2) remove the duplicated information from way/176209977 and be careful to add the necessary connection to perpendicular streets in order to not break bike router.

C'est contre les bonne mesures OSM. Je cite "All-way stops should ALWAYS be shown using highway=stop at the intersection node."

highway=stop

Hi,

When using `foot=use_sidepath`, a separated sidewalk needs to be mapped separately, which is not the case for all the edits in this changeset.

Please see : foot=use_sidepath

Hi,

Based on your account creation date and edits, I assume you are currently following the GEOG 466 class at Concordia. I just wanted to congratulate you, as your edits are clean, precise and professional.

Hope you get a A+ for this project!

Hi,

When adding sidewalks and crossings, please be sure they are correctly connected to roads too. I.e. dragging the connection node should pull both the crossing AND the road.

If you select this way way/992592277 in the Edit tab, you'll see that there is "Issues (2)" field on the left part of the screens. Please be sure that none are present when committing your changes in OSM.

I've tag a specific crossing, but you should also review all of those you added in this region.

Have a good day,

Hi,

Name on sidewalk should simply be the name of the road they correspond to. Adding "Sidewalk" is redundant information and not translation friendly.

Hi,

The "Parking aisle" ways shouldn't be use to mark the parking spots on the side of the road. This information should directly be added to the road itself.

Please refer to the correct documentation and revert those changes :
service=parking_aisle
parking:lane=*

Hi,

I've seen that you added a bunch of sidewalks and crossings in this area. However, they aren't properly connected to the main network, which might break softwares relying on OSM data. This means :
1) All ends of sidewalk should have crossings.
2) All overlapping ways should be connected together.

Also, please, before committing changes, ensure that all the "Warnings" and "Issues" below the "Changeset Comment" field are addressed.

> These edits are to be reviewed

Hi,

If those edits are to be reviewed, please use the "I would like someone to review my edits." checkbox before uploading your changes.

Speaking of reviews, those sidewalks lack many unmarked crossings and contact two dangling ways on Rue Simonne/12e Avenue and Rue Bonnier/12e Avenue intersections. Those create dead ends for pedestrian router and are to be avoided.

Hi,

This seems to be the default value automatically populated when selection the "Cycle & Foot path" feature types. This is probably were it came from in this case.

Is the default OSM editor faulty here?

Hi,

The cycle path you added is already present as a shared_lane on Rue Tasse : way/165096626#map=17/45.52018/-73.68434

Did this recently change and become a fully, segregated cycle path? If so, I'd invite you to also remove the information from Rue Tasse. Otherwise, if it was possible to avoid duplicating information, it'd be appreciated.

Hello!

Just a small comment :
When adding sidewalks, can you make sure that all related crossings are also mapped? Particularly this one : way/992230666 , it lacks crossing Tassé/Cardinal and Cardinal/Millar. It's minor, but otherwise router that support walk won't know how to quit the sidewalk at those intersections.

Thank you and have a good day!

These crosswalks :
-way/993098204
- way/993098210
- way/993098205

aren't properly connected to sidewalks.

Also, some aren't properly connected to the roads they cross :
- way/993098207
- way/993098208
- way/993098209

Plus, some crosswalks are just mapped on top of other sidewalks ?!?
- way/993100276

According to your changeset message, you are doing this for a class. But please, pay a little more attention to your edits. This isn't some class project that is going to be trashed at the end of term. Real people working on real projects rely on the exactitude of this information.

Hi,

This cycle path used to be part of the REV relation : osm.org/edit#map=18/45.54248/-73.62641

Why isn't the case anymore?

Parfait! Merci. J'avais aligné surtout pour éviter l'effet zigzag d'un tracé fait à la main, mais c'est bien mieux comme ça.

I'm referencing way/43521892 to be precise.