Hi, could you please select the actual sat imagery as listed in the table as 'aerial_imagery' is zero informative. You can also select automatic in JOSM, but that one will than include all imagery layers loaded, which are always 4 in my setup. The JOSM programmers on my request were not receptive to tracing the actual imagery utilised like ID does. Set a node with ESRI, that one gets listed, set another node in Clarity, get that one listed too. Reasonably useless as mapper feedback. I'd like to know which, and from a Italy chapter discussion it's significant to know so that changes and additions can be made with the same image offset, which as JOSM warns is a Clarity problem, and to some extend to Bing as well.

MGIA

3D ground imagery in fact confirms it's a lined drain.

This object with the questioned link
way/1120171874
is more very likely a drain which is whny you wont see a link to the parking side footway.

The reason I mapped the bridge 'area' was because I could not make out any ways. The standard carto does show this area properly.

But now zooming in, the area where the rail crosses probably should be retagged i.e. rail bridge removed and for the road part that goes below that quite wide grass covered section tunnel=yes+layer=-1.

Culverts don't render well in Carto but if there's no roof, considered a surface element.

Hi,

Not sure what layer there was to fix but a bridge on layer 1 and then the road 'cutting' is not considered underground. Now QA is asking for the tunnel tag. IF it's a tunnel, opinions differ,, then the rail bridge has to go.

Anyway, those 2 bridges next to the rail probably serve farm traffic and a underground drain(?), can't make out any track in imagery.

caio

Hi,

You know how the motorway was before, but now Flixbus N403 and 419 show big successive gaps on the motorway A4 going east from Mailand.

relation/9424216#map=15/45.5700/9.3819
relation/9424216#map=15/45.5700/9.3819

Since at least 1 section of motorway showing version V1 you must have been doing more than just cutting up the road. Anyway, this is what Turbo overpass shows what you touched in this change set

https://dev.overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=129785992&relations=true

No idea how the affected 2 Flixbus routes ran here before, straight on or visitng 1 or more stops at junctions.

ciao

Hi

Think the notation of construction:highway=secondary can be simplified to just construction=secondary (overpass 13K cases WW) versus construction:highway=* 4 cases WW

I'd cut the roads at the blocks and tag them as access=no or permit ad interim.

ciao

Hi,

Something changed on the Padova residential area to cause it a highlight in QA in Dec-2022, where the east side park has somehow incurred a duplicate segment ring (residential inner role passes between hospital and park) and self intersection which you already corrected.

Before correcting the duplicate inner role issue, the fixme on this residential area relation is now 4 years old. Ready to put it in vertical archive or just move it to an informational note or description tag as it continues to flag on anyone's OSMI report that touches this zone.

For your understanding JIC you unlikely don't already know, other readers might not, non 'residential' areas inside a larger residential zone don't need any role assignment of inner/outer. Hospitals, schools (like Don Bosco), parks, farmland, apartment complexes, gated communities, sports areas all render 'over' residential zones exactly the same as buildings do.

Anyway, it seems there's inconsistency in mapping what's inner and what not, one park is the other is not, one school is, the other is not etc.

Let me know and I'll put the area on my plan of attack list, not compromising the main outline as it is now.

ciao

Got sent before entering comment and used imagery, farming, yards, residentials, buildings, track, scrub, wood, resort, ways, lay improvement based on ESRI.

Update: Confirmed, the oneway sign belongs to the Poste Italiane parking. The service way is (open) gated, needed no exit at end, per corner sign is vico of Vallentinis civ 68-132.

ciao

Hi

Hope you know rhe solution to this 1 way dead end street problem. Either its dead end and oneway is wrong and needs a noexit on the last node or what i suspect the way does connect to Tartini.

way/1088099348#map=18/45.80320/13.54909

Hi,

Please be aware that schoolgrounds, sports complexes, parks, farmland, basically all non residential areas inside residential zones don't need to be tagged with inner roles. They render 'over'

ciao

Found them, you moved them to the highway itself.

👍

Hi,

Where are the sidewalks now... went for a hike?

The results are in

"pinging @Joxit - what was outcome of #2205 (comment) ?

(pinging again because two years passed, let me know if I should ping less)"

Topic to bin.

Initiated GitHub bug report.

If you put the maxheight=11.5 on the outline the result in 3D is the whole thing renders with that height. You wont see the elevated element. Height=0 makes sure the elements each render correctly (not documented but seen being used by other mappers after researching the vexing issue and it sure resolved the 1 single box 3D appearance). OSM assumes 3 meters per building level, where the height=* overrides the defaults.

The outline should in fact have building:levels=4 too.

The name (Municipio Tollo) on the 'type' outline is to make it recognisable in editing when picking relations, it does not render anywhere. What renders is "Municipio di Tollo".

buildingpart obsolete is new to me.

Anyway, the quick check is StreetComplete (well 'quick' is it updates every few days to a week). It rendered exactly as intended and reality. It's my routine check if all is well with multipart buildings.

I'm fine as it is now to include "These areas may overlap each other"

OK, so I see in turbo overpass

https://dev.overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=129432960&relations=true

that the grassland outline was removed for a large part. This makes the basin as now inner related to nothing, so I'll go ahead and delete that role, since it causes a red flag on the remaining grassland to north and west. Come time you rebuild the landcover a role can be assigned again as appropriate.

TTYL

It's perfectly fine as it was bar the building:part=yes of course, not civic as that's a repetition of what's tagged on the main building.