Hi, the number of lanes was increased to 4 in this changeset. However, this is exactly the same lane layout in the example on the wiki osm.wiki/Lanes#Crossing_with_a_designated_lane_for_bicycles, where lanes=3. Which is correct?

Hi, I was mapping in north Broward County, FL, and noticed the nodes. It seems both nodes and ways were originally created in the same changeset as both are/were v1. This is a small example: osm.org/edit?changeset=57250325#map=17/26.28700/-80.18459. Cheers

*unconnected untagged nodes

Hi, roads were deleted in this changeset, but their constituent nodes were not, so that what remains are unconnected untagged roads...

Hi, how is the DMV a logistics office?

Hi there, just curious as to what's the source for the areas you've added as parks? These are not listed in the State's natural areas, so I was wondering if you had a different source for these? They're already inside the Rookery Bay National Reserve, so their status as natural areas is already mapped through that object. Looking forward to your response.

Hi and thank you for your contributions. I'm curious as the new developed areas you've entered in the map, since I cannot corroborate them from any of the imagery sources available or my knowledge of the area. Are you sure all of this infrastructure already exists on the ground? I also can't find any reference to these elements online, the school for instance is not listed in the Collier County school registry etc. Lastly, since the imagery cited is not the source, is this an import? And if so, what is the source? We'd appreciate it if you could help us understand your changesets better by adding a more meaningful changeset comment (osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments). Thanks in advance for the additional info! :)

Would appreciate a response, since it seems you're applying this policy as a matter of course. At least there should be some reason you can provide or a link to those policies. Thanks again.

Since we never heard back from you regarding the license, the import has been reverted in changeset/58148644.

Thanks for getting back to me. I'll go ahead and revert the changeset then. Appreciate your efforts on the HOTOSM front, but in general we add to the map instead of deleting unless we have on-the-ground information that a feature no longer exists. Aerial imagery can be outdated esp. in the developing world, and so users may use their own GPS traces or other sources to create roads not visible on imagery. Thanks again & happy mapping! :)

Hi there, thanks for your contributions. Regarding the motorway junctions that were added in this changeset, please note that the ref tag on motorway junctions is used for numbered exits, not for the ref of the road to which the ramp leads to (destination:ref on the on/off-ramp is used for this purpose instead). This will lead to incorrect turn-by-turn instructions to drivers such as "take exit number 60", but there is no such signage on the ground, which might be at best confusing to drivers. Since there is no on-the-ground signage this also goes against OSM good practices of verifiability & mapping what's on the ground. Imho, destination tags on the ramps should be sufficient, and motorway junction tags are useful on motorways and trunk roads with numbered or named exits. Their usage in Colombia where neither of these features are present seems a departure from the common usage of this tag.

Hi, could you seem to have introduced a number of turn:lanes values on this changeset that don't match the number of lanes (e.g. lanes:backward=1, turn:lanes:backward=left;through;right). Would appreciate it if you could go through these and fix. Thanks!

Hello Michael, curious as to why you deleted the interchange on National Highways 25 and 25NRD in this changeset? If in error, please revert your changes, otherwise I will have to revert your changeset in full. Thanks in advance for your attention.

This road leads to the main town square, and connects it with other municipalities, so tertiary is not the right classification IMO, unless you had another reason?

No, automatic edits are discouraged and will not work in this scenario as you can't identify all roads which you erroneously changed to service. In addition you cant assume that all roads tagged highway=service are wrong, so you can't just change them all without introducing additional errors. You can download the overpass query I linked in my previous comment to JOSM, for example, and go through the features therein manually and reset the highway tags for residential roads now incorrectly tagged as service. If you're a paid mapper, you should look for assistance within your organization to maybe write a script or program that can go through your changesets and identify all residential roads you changed to service. The only other option would be to revert your changesets entirely, but then you'll lose all your work. If nothing is done though, that'll be the only option left. You can also ask for guidance at https://help.openstreetmap.org/

It appears the damage from your changesets is far more extensive than I originally thought. I would appreciate you helping to correct the error and revert these roads back to residential. This might be a good start http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/x5A Thanks

Please stop downgrading residential streets to service!

Kindly stop downgrading residential streets to service or I will have no choice but to report your account.

In the absence of a response, I've reverted your changes and reset the roads to highway=residential. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to get in touch. Kindly refrain from further road priority changes to service, thanks.

Might I ask the reason for downgrading Carrera 43A to the town center/main square of Sabaneta?