Hi fbello, i have modified your restriction edits https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/2631013. switched the role to meet the navigable route. in case you wanna validate it, please drop me a message. thank you

hi erickdeoliveiraleal, can u confirm where this road is https://bit.ly/2U4zaN1 ?

i found this relation https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/12483651 "from" role is not navigable since it was an opposite direction oneway road. lookin forward for your suggestion on this. thanks mate

Hi, kaartense
I found your relation edit on this restriction a bit weird https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/12178298. the "from" role comes from oneway road that's opposite direction to "to" role. temporary, I change the from role to the next oneway road. if you find it irrelevant, please repair it as you're the original editor. thanks mate

Great, thank you very much for your kind response, and also the guideline. that's helpfull

Hi markus, based on this image https://bit.ly/3iyCw59. I modified your turn restriction edit from no left turn to straight only, to way https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/900225012. So the "from" and "via" role still original, i change the "to" role. please have a look. thank you..

Hi marcao,
I found your edit on this relation https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/11271949 is a bit confusing. Just wanna you to confirm which one is "from" role and which one is "to" since the from role comes from the opposite direction of a oneway. thanks mate

Hi, popnlock
I found you removed a "from" role member from your own restriction edit https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/12715218. I was gonna repair it by adding the "from" role, but I found you are the one who edits and removed it. it would be nice to know your local knowledge about the missing role in a restriction relation. thanks mate.

Hi MiLorde, this restriction https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/9386488 seems irrelevant IMO. the "from" role is one way that has opposite direction in order to access "via" node. Can u confirm my advice ?? thanks mate.

Hi, Lthiesen, can u validate your edits on this restriction relation ? https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/12079405. it only contains 2 role (via and to), i couldnt found "from" role. thanks mate...

Hi Skipper, I removed your edit on this restriction relation https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/5371904 based on this image https://bit.ly/3vapEVe. if there is any update around, please let me know. thank you

Hi fbello,
can you confirm this restriction relation role https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/3938478 ? I found it weird as the "from" role has an opposite highway member to the "to" role. i think it might be the opposite.

Hi Valmirdm,
please have a look at your last month edit of restriction type relation. looks like this https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/8724198 relation missing a "from" role. there is only to and via. thank you

Hello mate,

I have made some modifications to your edits on this building relation https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/7414734. Since building is prohibited to draw as relation as stated here building=church, I transform the church boundary into an amenity area which including all of your information, while the building itself only contains building: church tag.

finally, with the amenity area tag, the church area will render in OSM differently that show exactly the edge of the church area that has different render color compared to building color.

very happy to hear your feedback.. thanks mate..

Hi mate,
it was great reading your explanation. I think i also have to discuss with the original mapper that added that restriction. I agree, it should be repaired. I deleted the relation based on whether the restriction is exists or not both physically (traffic sign) and visually. thanks for your kind response :)

Ah i see... very happy to hear that from local mapper. i might also wanna ask. is it fine to give a u turn restriction in OSM although it doesnt have any restriction sign on the field, maybe in Argentina it's a common way ? thank you in advance for your kind response and shared knowledge.

Hi..
Could you please check your relation edit in 2018 on this link ? https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/8496698. I found an opensource image on mapilary https://is.gd/6GTnj8. But i could not find any sign of no_u_turn on that relation. can u validate this image ? thank you very much.

Hi Omotesando
on your past changeset https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=102123106. you added a no-turn left restriction to that way. in fact, there is no restriction from and to role of your edits, hence, I remove it. please have a look thank you in advance.

Hi FenyMufyd

after researching the traffic flow of this area, also found out that the no turn right sign on your relation edit https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/11092736 should be placed at the node where there are a navigable route exist. So i moved the "via", "from" and "to" role to the next road section. please have a look.

Hi Martin

I remove your added restriction relation on this changeset https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/9919425. Cause on the role "to", there was no routable way to go cause it was a oneway road that opposite to the direction of the relation hence, no need to add restriction since it was oneway road. please have a look

Hi, can you clarify this way ? https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/555020055. it contains long bridge tag. there is also an unknown tag embankment=yes. in OSM wiki it is man_made=embankment. thank you