foot=permissive on a pedestrian street is weird, isn't it?

Is it temporary during construction?

Thanks for any explanation. Have a nice day!

Salut!

foot=discouraged ne peut pas être utilisé ici, car discouraged est seulement si il y a une pancarte spécifique. OpenStreetMap n'a pas le pouvoir de dire si un lien est dangereux ou pas à vélo ou à pied: voir ici pour le vélo, mais c'est la même chose pour la marche: bicycle=discouraged. Ça doit être mis dans un autre outil.

Aussi: sidewalk=no et sidewalk:both=no veulent dire la même chose ici.

Merci!

This path does not seem to be indoor. Can you confirm a roof was built here? And if there is a new roof, shouldn't it be covered=yes?

Thanks!

Hi!

Please use bicycle=dismount, except when it is forbidden to even walk alongside the bicycle. Thanks!

Bonjour!

SVP mettre bicycle=dismount sauf s'il y a une pancarte interdisant même de marcher à côté du vélo (très rare)

Sorry! You fixed it, forget my previous message, I was looking at a previous changeset!

HI! Please do not change number of lanes with placement=transition. There is the tag width:lanes:start to show that the fourth lane has 0 width at the beginning and full width at the end. Thanks!

oneway=no is implicit and the default value for any highway. You don't need to add this tag. Thanks and have a nice day!

Hi!

Please be careful and listen to warnings and errors before saving. This changset moved nodes that were not meant to be moved.
You can see a visualization of your changes here: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=172312939#16/45.4063/-73.4853

I will revert. Fell free to re-fix the turn lanes you wanted to update in a new changeset, without moving the nodes away. Thanks and have a nice day!

nodes moved kilometers away for no reason

changeset/172341788

Can you confirm that you have the right to use NearMap with OSM, because it is clearly said on the wiki that NearMap cannot be used because of its restricted license:

osm.wiki/NearMap_PhotoMaps

Thanks!

Thanks! It is ok for the turn lanes, but please do not remove transitions:

See the wiki on lanes: osm.wiki/Lanes at section "Motorway with lanes and destinations" and osm.wiki/Proposal:Placement section "Current status: lane count decreases"

Thanks!

Thanks!

See the wiki on lanes: osm.wiki/Lanes at section "Motorway with lanes and destinations" and osm.wiki/Proposal:Placement section "Current status: lane count decreases"

Thanks!

OK, thanks! However, please do not remove the placement=transition and change the number of lanes when there is a width:lanes:start/width:lanes:end also. Thanks!

Hi!

THere is indeed a transition from 3 to 4 lanes here. Please follow wiki on placement transition and do not remove these tags.

When we use placement=transition with width:lanes:start or width:lanes:start, we must include the partial lane also. Thus the tags were correct before the edit. See the updated version of the wiki on lanes (motorway section): osm.wiki/Lanes

Also, the sidewalks were carefully aligned using official geodesic data, so please do not realign ways unless you can verify that your alignement/imagery offset is accurate. Thanks!

Hi!

Unmarked crossings are added so pedestrian routing works and is realistic. In Quebec, it is legal to cross the street at any intersection except where there is a no-foot sign, which is rare. I will have to revert your changeset.

Please keep the lanes count accurate with transitions. The width:lanes:start/end tags are there to specify where the lanes start/end.

Hi! Please do not add turn:lanes that are not painted on the ground. You seem to add data for the router only.

Please don't remove transitions (you reduced the number of lanes which is innaccurate, the width:lanes:start/end are there to specify where the lanes start and end). Also, please do not add turn lanes if there are none on the ground/painted.