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

Ciao,

Ho apportato alcune modifiche ai tag come com'era dopo la tua mappatura nessun agricoltore poteva raggiungere la sua terra e i residenti non la loro casa. Almeno il tag agricolo=yes consente ai veicoli agricoli di utilizzare quei modi.

La parte a senso unico su "Via" della Caprina è un altro mistero su come raggiungere l'edificio che ho mappato all'inizio quando il "percorso" è per impostazione predefinita non consentito per veicoli a motore, nessun trasporto di veicoli. Inoltre c'era un modo duplicato, il percorso in cima alla pista e una linea completamente priva di tag, entrambi rimossi. In totale una situazione piuttosto dubbia.

Le strade private sono contrassegnate come access=private, dove il nome 'via privata Ezio Langerano' è discutibile. Esiste un'origine del documento per questo o dovrebbe essere contrassegnata come loc_name anziché come nome?

Si prega di consigliare

Agreed, momentarily mapping in San Vito area, this looks like a something pulled from the right sleeve, even including the whole area of the pier with trabocchi.

Since this is the one and only edit made by this mapper it's likely a plant that can be unceremoniously deleted. / months on no reply, so I'll ditch it in the next edit set sometime tonight.

Excellent revelation. Duly bookamrked for my reference.

Revelations: The wiki actually tells that removing area=yes and changing aeroway to area:aeroway=runway does the trick as well and sure enough, ID no longer gives the alert.

Runways have to be mapped threshold to threshold. Those still shows in the sat imagery.

So, for now all is well with just the little change. Will be checking back how this renders afterwards. area:highway tends to disappear the carto showing.

The orignal mapper communicated with left it untouched and while historically mapped as area, there's places where both are mapped, line and area, rendering has evolved so the length-breadth suffice to get the area affect in Carto at least. Changing it to line can still preserve the change history, it just needs doing the proper sequence.

ciao

Amenity=kindergarten has 277 thousand uses per taginfo

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=kindergarten

I feel there's a missing school= or school_type=kindergarten i.e.

amenity=schoo +
school-type=kindergarten

With just school:FR there no pulling a global picture of kindergartens the way it goes.

2 Euro cents, while this came in my face through a 5 continent touching edit set.

Ciao from Italy.

Grazie

appl i info osm.org/changeset/125687697 incl i fosso.

ciao

Hi,

Per a previous discussion with a mapper, this runway is effectively in disuse but for a single annual festive event i.e. think it should be tagged as such, either additionally with disused=yes or as prefix to aeroway as disused:aeroway=runway. See osm.org/changeset/118296290#map=16/50.0838/19.9952

Also per text book, runways have to be mapped as line with the length and width tags sufficing to render the area. Both tags are present. Mapped as area it gives this warning in ID Editor

"Runway 11/29 should be a line, not an area

Convert this to a line"

There's no escaping out but to hit the ignore button in ID Editor.

cheers

Hi

As a reminder, do yuo have an answer for me so the issues can be fixed?

MTIA

Come promemoria, hai una risposta per me in modo che i problemi possano essere risolti?

MGIA

It is suspected the previous mapper considered some area for the new rail corridor but much wider than the 1 track line thart already exists here. The vineyard next to the repaird farmland still looks to have a wrong shape, rail or no rail.