Ignoring iD warning messages counts as editing error in How Did You Contribute Quality Assurance statistics, which does not help with your issue.

Another point where key=value systems seems inadequate is shop=*.

For example there’s a shop that sells bot stationery items and computer hardware. It’s currently tagged as 2 nodes (9559041030 & 9559041033) which is not only inelegant but a violation of One-Element-Rule.

Unlike =path sub-tags I’m not aware of a better solution being used.

I’d add a sub-point to “Keep Consistent Distance Between Nodes”: node spacing should be proportional to curvature:

• If the curve is tight segments should be shorter,
• if it’s gentle they should be longer and
• if the segment is straight as laser beam then it should have no intermediate nodes unless something else requires it

That way the angular spacing is more consistent and we use nodes where they are the most useful.

Thanks for responding back Peter.

I understand that if there’s physical separation then the carriageway is broken into segments and the OSM highways should branch away.

What spurred me into commenting was the scheme that you documented being used for a turbo where the only separators are the road markings ( Example here ). I think in such cases lanes-as-attributes would be more in line with existing road tagging.

This proposed sheme seems to be a significant violation of “one highway segment per carriageway” rule.