Ciao

23 avvisi per riepilogo CS e una grande lacuna nel proposto confine Matese

Hi,

23 warnings per CS summary and a big gap in the proposto Matese boundary.

Many thanks for your reply and backup. Absent a start date or a delivery/expected date of completion, those SS14 ways need change from highway=construction to highway=proposed and construction=primary changed to proposed=primary. Contruction is only to be used when work has really started. See highway=proposed

ciao

After an 'in situ', talking to the resident at Nr3, metal nr on gate ), Via Moldava, made the necessary adjustments and additions. The thru road is real, as proposed but never materialised. That was to become the official road. There's also a nr 1+3 at the start of Vistola, so the story does add up.

Ciao,

Sono venuto qui perché alcuni modi sono stati mappati su altri modi (modi duplicati). Hai mappato questa rotatoria e ricostruito il percorso, ma le immagini di luglio 2022 su entrambe le estremità dicono che non una vanga è finita nel terreno. Quindi, c'è un punto qualsiasi della traiettoria in costruzione, c'è una data di inizio prevista, una data prevista di completamento? In caso contrario, il tagging dovrebbe essere modificato in "proposto".

Si prega di rispondere in modo che i problemi di mappa/percorso possano essere risolti correttamente.

saluto,

Hi,

I came here because some ways were mapped on other ways. (duplicate ways) You mapped this roundabout and reconstructed route, but July 2022 imagery says not a spade went into the ground, log normal. So, is this anywhere on the trajectory under construction, is there an expected start date, expected date of completion? If not, the tagging should be changed to 'proposed'.

Please reply so the map/routing problems can be properly resolved.

Ciao

Perché mappare un percorso su strade esistenti? Il modo corretto per mappare i percorsi escursionistici/passeggiati è creare una relazione contrassegnando tutta la sezione di strada con la relazione che fa parte del percorso. È possibile aggiungere solo sezioni che non sono state mappate in precedenza.

In questo momento il tuo set di modifiche ha generato molte centinaia di avvisi di nodi non connessi, ne hai corretti circa 165 nella versione 2, ma ancora molte centinaia di aree rimanenti.

Comunque. Esiste un riferimento ufficiale per queste percorsi poiché il mappatore nella versione 3 ha modificato il numero della percorso da 1 a 11.

Se mi fornisci un link ai percorsi documentati (2 anelle) sarei felice di farlo come si deve.

Ciao dall'Abruzzo

(in inglese per gli stranieri)

Hello

Why map a route on existing roads? The correct way to map hiking / walking routes is to create a relationship then marking the entire stretch of road with the relationship that is part of the route. You can only add sections that have not been mapped previously.

Right now your change set has generated many hundreds of unconnected node warnings, you have corrected about 165 in version 2, but there are still many hundreds of unconnected nodes left.

Anyway. There is an official reference for these routes as the mapper in version 3 changed the route number from 1 to 11.

If you give me a link to the documented routes (2 rings) I would be happy to do it properly.

Greetings from the Abruzzi

Spiacenti, mappatore sbagliato, l'intenzione era di inviare questo alla persona della versione 1 e 2

Ciao

Perché mappare un percorso su strade esistenti? Il modo corretto per mappare i percorsi escursionistici/passeggiati è creare una relazione contrassegnando tutta la sezione di strada con la relazione che fa parte del percorso. È possibile aggiungere solo sezioni che non sono state mappate in precedenza.

In questo momento il tuo set di modifiche ha generato molte centinaia di avvisi di nodi non connessi, ne hai corretti circa 165 nella versione 2, ma ancora molte centinaia di aree rimanenti.

Comunque. Esiste un riferimento ufficiale per queste percorsi poiché il mappatore nella versione 3 ha modificato il numero della percorso da 1 a 11.

Se mi fornisci un link ai percorsi documentati (2 anelle) sarei felice di farlo come si deve.

Ciao dall'Abruzzo

(in inglese per gli stranieri)

Hello

Why map a route on existing roads? The correct way to map hiking / walking routes is to create a relationship then marking the entire stretch of road with the relationship that is part of the route. You can only add sections that have not been mapped previously.

Right now your change set has generated many hundreds of unconnected node warnings, you have corrected about 165 in version 2, but there are still many hundreds of unconnected nodes left.

Anyway. There is an official reference for these routes as the mapper in version 3 changed the route number from 1 to 11.

If you give me a link to the documented routes (2 rings) I would be happy to do it properly.

Hello from the Abruzzi

Hi,

Buildings in Ethiopia AND what?

You did more, touching creating an Change Set bound box touching on 3 continents along the way. Incomplete edit comment and edit set sitting in local CS history view for the next few days for everyone within that CS bound box.

Here's a wiki discussing how to be a good OSM citizen, in German for your convenience, but if you like to read in another tongue just follow the links top of the page.

Ciao from Italy.

Hi,

Great job you're doing. Small but important issues though: When you cut roads section to incorporate in routes, you also change the turn restriction rules way sections the rules cover. Also when removing names, mind the source:name tagging I use abundantly to point at what the base is of a name. No more name, remove the source:name tag as well

And, when you do any of this over and above the routing, please mention in the CS comment.

MGIA

After 20 odd JOSM CSs a quote "
... Like many things in JOSM, it appears to be a bit convoluted for a simple task, but it seems to work"

The images frame is fine, colours of objects need definition, trees mapped on trees background are near impossible to see, the sidebar fonts are way to small in the interface even in the Windows Classic view.

Next up stitching all the Cammini di San Filippo Neri together into a super hiking relation. The hikers will explode. :O)) There's one who wrote to me he'd done L'Aquila to Termoli, 5 times (something like 300km.) He mapped it proper thru relations and adding many missing tracks and paths that weren't there before.

ciao

Every Door, the fad I've seen many new mappers jump on the last few weeks and leaving a trail, from the Google play store. Clearly not mature yet. It should, like StreetComplete, leave things alone if the value is present. In many cases by definition, 'yes' is the no good answer anyhow. The question I ask is "yes, what?" and consult taginfo frequently to see what's good, bad and ugly. The drop down lists in ID Editor are not exactly clean either.

Hi,

2 flags in QA jumped out in this spot. Why did you change traffic tables on the marked crossings to yes? The wizard fills this out, where yes is a meaningless qualification for this feature.

Hi,

Your update created or touched upon several issues as shown below the CS change set commentary. Please address.

MGIA

Actually my thinking is then they'd get numbers in the Via Vistola series. The corner house is nr 7 on the wall and the next (new) house on the uneven side is 13 leaves 9-11 unaccounted for.

The litmus test is the house address numbering.

Via Moldava does not exist in the CAP register listings.

Absent response on multiple queries by gscholz for this Cibli31, went ahead and deleted the paths on top of the tracks and created walking route relations.

Ciao,

Il tuo set di modifiche ha 8 avvisi tra cui "warnings:impossibile_oneway:highway"

Osservazioni:

Passi e percorso a senso unico? Veramente?
Scalini sopra gradini? Non c'è modo.

Ogni volta che si mappano i percorsi, considerare se un veicolo che entra, può uscire.

Ho corretto gli 8 problemi e ti chiedo di tenerne conto nei tuoi prossimi sforzi di mappatura

Grazie

Wiki for Prominence says it's an abandoned feature proposal i.e DNU.

osm.wiki/Proposed_features/key:prominence

quote
""this property is not suited for adding to OSM because it is

"computable based on suitable external data."
"practically non-verifiable except by computing it based on suitable external data."

The absence of a link to documentation of the tag is telling.

Just FYI