Yes, at least some years ago the "via" member was not supported by some data consumers, for that reason I mapped a lot of these restrictions as no_left_turn. I would expect that was fixed nowadays but it seems that it hasn't happened yet. It's their fault, not the data, but anyway is better if we can map in a way that the data is useful for most people.

Hola. Gracias por los aportes. Hago la revision que pediste.

Cuando agreges elementos que se supone que son rectangulos o cuadrados, conviene que tambien quede la forma cuadrada en el mapeo.

Para eso, segun el editor, tiene una funcion "Ortogonalizar" o "make Square" que pone los angulos a 90° de la figura que tengas seleccionada.

Saludos.
M.

Hola. Las rampas estan algo desplazadas, no se si es porque no habia imagen buena cuando las dibujaste o que. Te aviso porque no quise tocarlas por las dudas.

Hola. Las escuelas publicas son operator:type=public no government. Ver osm.wiki/ES:Key:operator:type?uselang=es

Sure, thanks for your help.

Yes, as you saw a lot of no u turn signals where mapped as no left turn because that is what they mean, weird but is the way it is. The no_left_turn restriction solves it. The signals are confusing, the no_u_turn means that you cannot use http//www.openstreetmap.org/way/341551036 so the no left turns would model the real world. the same way is allowed to turn left NW while going NE, and crossing SE.

This is mapped as trunk because that is the defined criteria, but nowadays it is a slow avenue, a lot of pedestrians and old cars, motorbikes and bikes, a lot of traffic calming bumps, radars, traffic signals, so is better to try to avoid using it.

Disculpame, tengo un conocido que se llama asi y se me paso sin querer.

Va ejemplo: node/9759838989

Hola Fernando. Lo que hiciste de los limites en algunos puntos de puente y rio esta mal. Puente y rio no tienen que compartir nodo. Por algo estaba como estaba.

Same comment as your other changeset.

Hi. Please do not duplicate features. Remember the OSM rule: one feature, one element.
The terminals were already mapped years ago. See way/256795438 and way/26199254

No, no, it should be mapped, is a real existing object. But it should also be analyzed in the context ot the other mapped objects. I'm not sure what the best mapping would be, but there is a need to map that you cannot turn left like the previous version of this restriction was imposing. relation/4848638 . Maybe adding the restriction, maybe fixing drawing the service way, i don't know...

Hi. While you change is strictly correct and mapping the legal regulatory sign that is there, in practice, in OSM it allows a router to suggest to drive SW and turn there and enter in the Y shaped service way, which is also forbidden and dangerous.

Y esa parte de la calle que borraste y pusiste una nueva como Arturo Prat no esta bien, esa parte es Rambla Armenia y no esta flechada.

Hola. No borres las veredas que estan mapeadas como footway, porque rompes el ruteo peatonal.

Hola. Yo también, pero ese es el nombre correcto. Esta asi en los mapas de hidrografia y en las cartas del IGM.

Hi. Obviously Esri World Imagery is not a source for this change. Which source did you use?

thanks.

Hi. Canals are canals...

Hi. Please don't add these kind of roads as "highway=residential". At most they are highway=service and private.