OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
173334572 3 months ago

Ces allées n'appartiennent pas à la ville et sont des accès privés aux résidences et à leurs stationnements. Ce n'est donc pas une rue résidentielle. Pouvez-vous corriger SVP?
Merci et bonne journée!

172716338 3 months ago

I do not recommend it either, but to access shops on the roadside, we must keep foot access. Thanks!

173105150 3 months ago

See here: it could be correct/legit to add the footway=sidewalk tag here:

osm.wiki/Sidewalks#Cycleway_and_footway_on_sidewalk

173105150 3 months ago

It is indeed possible to check for the footway=sidewalk tag, but the issue would be that if you want to analyse the presence of sidewalks/separated footways on all roads, it would then reduce this road to a one-sided separated footway access. Two solution: add the footway=sidewalk to the cycling path, which could be weird, but accurate in this case, or count cycleways alongside roads as a sidewalk.

173105150 3 months ago

Hi! The cycleway on the right is accessible to pedestrian, thus usable as a sidewalk.

173049776 3 months ago

Please do not fix valid data. There was a placement=transition which was connected at the beginning of the theoretical gore. The data was correct. I will revert. Sorry for the inconvenience and have a nice day!

173090977 3 months ago

Reverting. This was correct. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience.

173090272 3 months ago

Alignment was correct and followed the theoretical gore with placement=transition. Please do not fix non-errors. Short segments are quite ok when precise data is drawn. Thanks!

173043543 3 months ago

In Quebec, when we validate and complete the data in a specific area like this one, we are adding very precise data, so very short segments are often created. This is not an error. Thanks!

173043543 3 months ago

Thanks!

173043543 3 months ago

Hi!
The geometry was correct by following the theoretical gore. What was wrong and what kind of error were you trying to fix? Thanks!

172818230 3 months ago

Thanks!

162070381 3 months ago

No problem thanks!

172858639 3 months ago

Also, can you confirm that the crossings at Meilleur/Sauvé are zebra and not lines? The last photo from June 2025 has lines, and not zebra.

172858639 3 months ago

Hi! Thanks for the updates in Ahuntsic. However, please use cycleway=lane instead of track when only flex posts are installed. See wiki specific to Canada about this: osm.wiki/Canada#Mapping_cycleways

Thanks!

172818230 3 months ago

Please contact your whole team so I do not have to revert multiple times. Thanks! Sorry for the typos in the previous message! Have a nice day!

172818230 3 months ago

Hi! Icontacted you guys some tim ago. Please do not cahnge transition tag and change the number of lanes, please follow the wiki: lanes=*

When there is placement=transition, you should keep the width:lanes:end/width:lanes:start and put the right number of lanes. Thanks!

172716338 3 months ago

Can you specify which information tell you it is prohibited to pedestrians here? There is no sign and it makes some shops on the "Desserte" not accessible to foot traffic. It is not pedestrian friendly, but I am pretty sure it is not prohibited. Thanks!

172657732 3 months ago

I will fix it, thanks!

172683180 3 months ago

Thanks! Is it passable for foot and bicycle traffic though?