If there is a single node on a crossing as a sum of all individual traffic signals then it's appropriate to use the all directions tag. I prefer mapping the pedestrian and various traffic signals per street and crossings also because of the noted 1 way streets that wont have a signal, bar that for pedestrians.
Anyway, I see the crossing type is uncontrolled so it's correct to remove the directions tag, which I don't remember why I added it at all, some QA prog maybe probably had given an erroneous flag.

BTW see now the 'Ponte Ognissanti' name on the table crossing node. First time I see crossing nodes having a name.

ciao

BTW, countless people forget the direction tag on signals, stops/yield, traffic signs in general.

direction=both refers to the traffic_signals. The correct for that is actually traffic_signals:direction, just to keep it simple ;O)))

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/traffic_signals:direction

Sometimes I actually enter the degrees exact, with a crossing that have 1 or more one ways joining. Then Osmose/OSMI gives a false warning of 'may need traffic_signals:direction'. Hit ignore button.

ciao

Errata: Something to know: If there's a conflict of naming for instance with a Toponomastica, the wiki is clear: Name signs on road supersede, and apparently this was recently reconfirmed over at Italian Telegram where someone went about changing long street names to the short Via Cavour, where they were before the full name of the count.

cheers

Oh, and indeed I see now I was the name change maker :o)))

That's funny, my change versions area V6+V7 and before at V4-V5 you made changes to that way with that name, so I think you're asking the wrong person.

That said since it's 'Ponte' and the name extends across the bridge, it might very well be around there and sure enough, west-end of the bridge is the sign, pointing west. Propose you add the tag source:name=sign and description:it= segna da ponte or similar.

ciao

Hi,

If you wonder why almost nothing renders on your WIP area, wrong type. The cathedral in Chieti will tell you the correct once although that one has still something wrong indicated by the non-religious building colour render in Carto.

ciao

thx for putting my intended note in the right place. Baumschule just does not translate very well into OSM tagging.... plants are not trees, me thinketh, and the universal translator makes it asilo in italain (asylum, asyl) which is truly funny.

caio.

Repaired 3 more bus routes at Pz di Saxa Rubra in 3 more CSs.

Hi,

Did repairs of your junction change sistemazione at Pz Saxa Rubra in CS osm.org/changeset/129428267 to include 5 bus routes broken as signalled by Osmose. There are more routes passing here of which I'm not sure if still whole.

ciao

Ciao e benvenuto in OSM

La tua strada pedonale è stata rimossa mentre la mappavi in ​​cima al corridoio del parcheggio. Ho contrassegnato il corridoio del parcheggio con la presenza di un marciapiede

Felice mappatura

Ciao e benvenuto in OSM

Dov'è 'Viale dei pini' o 'Viale dei Pini'(?) a cui ti riferivi nell'indirizzo del cimitero? Indicare la strada interessata e la fonte: nome che si presume sia la strada che passa per il cimitero.

Inoltre, non fare riferimento due volte allo stesso oggetto. Il cimitero è già mappato come oggetto area. Il tag amenity=cemetery dovrebbe essere rimosso, ma dovrebbe essere aggiunto addr:city=Picciano. Lo stesso nodo dell'indirizzo di localizzazione rende evidente già a cosa si riferisce.

Buona mappatura.

Well, when you were about to save your change set you had a warning of 5 per the summary above. I only noticed because this global edit set crow barred itself into my little Italy corner change set history view and opened it to see if it affected my regular area of mapping, said corner. Did not, so I FYI'd you on the notice and closed. The probability is that if you open up your personal Osmose and OSMI problems listing, they will include these. E.g today my list, which is short and kept short includes: "The tag `landuse=reservoir` is deprecated in favour of `natural=water`+ `water=reservoir`", so I fix that in a minute.

The summary of the issues of items you touched you find at https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?Arctic%20gnome

Anyway, you commented in the CS 'time zones', so best guess it is related to those tags.

ciao

Just select the V1 piece in ID Editor edit view. The sidepanel should list 18 relations lest someone came in and made other changes afterwards

188 > 18 (routes).
All is fine now, that is for the various bits that would need reviewing updating and adding, but that's wont be on my calendar or Todo.

The version inheriting is correct, the loss of the 18 routes on the V1 segment is not. It just should not have happened with just a simple way split, I know for a fact that route G21 was closed, Ran 3 weeks ago an analysis and the outcome was that all was fine. Reloaded the bookmarked link and the report states it's fine again:

https://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=14341380&_noCache=on

caio

The ways themselves are not broken The split at the bus stop west side is OK since a 2 hike routes take a left at bottom of steps.

Ground imagery of Feb 22 shows a marked crossing missing from the map where the footway connects to the road. There's a bus stop painted on road, but no pole and a 3 car parking. Not going to touch anything more here as that what I came for has been corrected.

I know there are bugs in the history keeping. I.e. problems show up on the Inspector maps who's last tag is years ago, nothing in the history to indicate there was a change, yet there was a change. Yesterday a self intersecting building, V1, 4 years ago, yet the self intersection must be from the day before as the building renders in 2km zoom and below (1 week old render update) but not in 1km and up (render update in minutes). Just fix it and move on. If I could put my finger on it I'd report it, but cant. The OSM change log few iterations ago mentioned a better tag retention and history when splitting, but can't this here as a statement of improvement.

BTW, This is what Turbo overpass says

create way 1116858964
timestamp 2022-11-24 12:28
user micheleOSM3
version 1
changeset 129320775
highway primary
lanes 2
maxspeed 50
maxweight 5
noname yes
ref SS14
surface asphalt

https://dev.overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=129320775&relations=true

First there was a change from V14 to V15, then a split was applied at the bus stop where a hike route seems to have overshot to the south past the bus stop on east side. Cut point was fine, why all 188 route got lost, not just the hike part is mysterious.

As an aside there's a maxweight=5 on that road. Primary, brand new asphalt, doubt it. No source:maxweight tag to say what the source is of the restriction. Don't want to know but suspect it's something that proliferated when early there was 1 long way mapped in OSM for the SS14.

Caio

Hi,

Weeeell, you changed this one, but not the other 2 with the same 'typo', so I fixed that this morning since a soundex flag was raised. Now all 3 are same and correct.

ciao

Don''t know, V1 is the logical result of splitting a way but AFAIK it never deletes the relations. from from any section except when it pertains to turn relations, then the 'from' or 'to' part stays with the way that connects to the 'via' node.

At any rate, tomorrow we'll learn what the QA analysers think of this. One thing though i always do: When splitting ways and modifying I check afterwards of of routes in any direction crossing the modified ways are still whole. Here I checked the before and after this V1 part to see all were whole. Even the SS14 road number relation was broken.

Wish mappers would do this checking with new roundabouts which pop up like cup cakes. The number of routes I've repaired around this road feature are nearing countless.

cheers.

Well, when i reatored the 18 route relations on that way it had version V1 on it. Splitting does not lose relations, that is for sure. Cant even disconnect a way in ID editor long as a relation link exists on a way, but in JOSM anything is possible, just hit ignore and upload.

Why i got there is because I worked on route 21 and suddenly got msgd by Osmose it had a new gap again at tbat section then seeing that all route relations had a gap tbere with a bus stop for the 4n routes. There's a hiking route that branches off from that newly cut section.

Anyway it took time to fix and why i fixed all 18 is because if you touvh a way, Osmose makes you co-owner of all linked problems.

Ciao

Hi,

Whatever you did, turbo overpass says you were the last one to touch this road section, but 18 routes were broken here at this short road piece.

ciao