Hi Russ,
Apologies for the genuine miss from my end. I have made this edit as per the continuous feedback from our drivers. Thanks for bringing up this to my notice and making the necessary changes. I will take this as a learning from the community and will pass on this information to my colleagues so that this mistake does not repeat. Happy to learn from you.
Best Regards,
asnghpi.

As mentioned earlier, we have verfied earlier with different options, but found it not possible to implement from our end. You can find multiple articles on this topic in the internet. The one I shared is also what I found on the internet.
Thanks
asnghpi

Hi Spyker,
For reference sharing you the following article talking about the legal restrictions (https://www.goethe.de/en/kul/med/20849366.html). Not sure of the analysis done by our team, but overall it is identified collecting imagery is not allowed as a corporate member hence we avoided that approach. Also walking paper is not a possible approach for our usecase hence avoided it. We are trying our best approches to collect as much information as possible and contribute it back to OSM, but most of them were still under analysis. Until then, we want to limit out edits to only what we are 100% sure off.
regards
asnghpi

Hi Skyper,
As already mentioned I genuinely apologize for the miss from my end. As I should have either added a barrier or made a disconnection. Thanks for fixing the area. In General, We do add service = driveway whenever the road is leading to single entity and we are sure that it is a driveway. But in this scenario, I haven’t added any additional service=* tag as It is leading to various type of entities which seem to be commercial/Industrial and there is no enough evidence to define the type Service = *(highway=service). Due to Legal Restrictions in the Country we are not allowed to collect images of an area. Hence, we would not be able to send the drivers to collect the photos. We would rely on available OSM resources and the community feedback to improve our edits.
Regards,
asnghpi.

Hi Skyper,
Since you requested to pass on this information to all the team members, I have reached out to my supervisor. I have posted my response post discussion with him. He must have already looked into your other changeset comment with similar forum discussions hence his suggestion have been on similar lines. But ideally the responses were independent. But going through the other changeset discussion I can correlate it to this changeset as well.

Since it has been 5 months, I was not able to re-collect my exact edit. I must have split the road at this intersection to add the barrier, but by mistake I might have missed adding it from my end. I will make sure such errors are not repeated from my end again.

Regards,
asnghpi

Thanks for sharing the feedback and providing the forum discussion. I had a look through the forum discussion and completely agree with your suggestions. We are making our edits based on the information provided by the OSM wiki pages. However, we are facing some difficulties as the information from the forum is not included in the osm wiki to adapt into our editing work flow and we are finding it hard as some of the community members suggestions are in conflict with the other community members suggestion.

Also, one of the community member suggested to validate our edits from the ground proof. I have added the road as per the delivery partners feedback and the OSM satellite imagery. I have not added the gate and access as the area is obscured by vegetation at that specific point and there is no street view to validate the existence of a gate. We are adding the additional information where ever we found the valid supporting evidence.

It will be really helpful if the community can propose a method to identify the additional features from the OSM resources like satellite and street imagery. Always happy to learn from the community and implement in our future edits.

Hi,
Thanks for checking our edits. I have added driveway as the adjoining segment is already tagged as a driveway. I apologise for the misinterpretation. I have modified the segment to parking aisle as per your suggestion( ). Thanks for your constructive feedback.
Regards.
asnghpi

Hi,
My supervisor is on leave, I will respond to this. First of all let me apologize for this irresponsible edit. We are trained to avoid mix up of personal edits/and corporate edits, all my colleagues use their personal IDs to contribute to OSM in their personal capacity. We were also warned not to edit outside of our geography unless we have local knowledge. I must have followed the same, but I misjudged and edited it from my office account. I mistook black line in bing satellite imagery with gate, added it. As soon as we heard from the community, my supervisor connected with me and explained the error I have committed. I will make sure not to repeat this any further. Thanks for the feedback.
Thanks

Hi,
I have added road as per available background imageries. However, I did not add any access as I don't have enough proof to add the access. If you have some information regarding the access, Please modify or let me know i will make the changes. Happy to learn from community.
Regards
asnghpi

Hi Tordans,
Thanks for improving the edit. Always happy to receive community help in improving our edits in OSM.
Regards,
asnghpi

Hi Limes11,
I have added the connection based on available aerial imagery, but overlooked the tags given to the Area feature. I apologize for the miss from my end, I have reverted my changes (Changeset:95613936) based on your feedback. Going forward i ll keep a tab on these features in my future edits. Thanks for the constructive feedback.
Regards,
asnghpi

thanks for checking into our edits. apologies, i have missed checking the esri imagery . thanks for improvising our edits with the local knowledge. going forward, i will be very cautious while modifying the existing geometry. thanks for your suggestions. always happy to learn from the community.
Regards
asnghpi

“My sincere apologies, I have created the road based on the available satellite imagery and missed checking the note description and building feature. thanks a lot for the quick correction. going forward, I will be very cautious while modifying the existing features in osm. I will make sure to strictly maintain the quality of my future edits. once again, thanks for the suggestions”