Reminder: `name=` and `place=` are the existing common name and concepts in public use, not what you think should be correct or proper. Put historic names and locations in OpenHistoricalMap, not OSM. Discuss with the community, where the Discord server (https://discord.com/invite/CyG9zte) has been made available in OSM Community Index for a long time already, and there is a wiki project (osm.wiki/Hong_Kong).

Reminder: `name=` and `place=` are the existing common name and concepts in public use, not what you think should be correct or proper. Put historic names and locations in OpenHistoricalMap, not OSM. Discuss with the community, where the Discord server (https://discord.com/invite/CyG9zte) has been made available in OSM Community Index for a long time already, and there is a wiki project (osm.wiki/Hong_Kong).

You should ask those applications. We don't control how each of them work.
It's likely they show `ref=` when zoomed out, and `name=` zoomed in. You would need to suggest to show both.

Please don't add bracketed labels to `name=` which is for proper names only. `ref=` already exists.

There's nothing missing here
way/44574055
node/1281244414

Please don't add `railway=station` + `public_transport=station` to each structure, which should only be `building=train_station` . This is duplicating.

1. As mentioned before, please don't add such artificially synthesized names. `name=` is for proper names only. Applications can generate labels with `from=` , `via=` , and `to=` , etc.
2. The `wikidata=` and `wikipedia=` are not usable, as they are grouping item and article for everything in HK across all levels
3. They are not really a `=route` in the first place. But as they were already created, they can be kept route-like for usability. It's not helpful to group everything in a district together.

0. Please have upload comments
1. Please don't delete directly. They may have addresses, and still represent a store space. This makes tracking and updating more difficult. Change to a plain "Point"

1. It's not a `=park` or `=playground` on its own, and have different facilities inside
2. Why did you delete the bike area?

Corrected (as seen from others)

No, this was intentional before as proposed and adopted by others, for the `=motorway` extent problem way/835665898/history/1

Please don't attach areas to roads. This does not reflect reality, and makes editing difficult.

Perhaps as mentioned before, `bus` would include at least non-franchised bus in HK. That's why `oneway:bus:conditional=` is used, which could still be `=no @ (private) in more standard terms.

Corrected (maybe `sidewalk=` autosuggest fail)

2. And should not change the `=service`

This `access=no` has no effect if you override it with `foot=` , except for `bicycle=` perhaps. However, `=permit` is defined as ordinarily granted (cf cross-border travel), which should be `=private` if it's restricted.

There's no need to add `access=` anymore, as Carto renders `motor_vehicle=` now. `foot=no` etc is already assumed for `=motorway` , which shouldn't be added unnecessarily.

Using uppercase simply amplify your mistake. To repeat what's mentioned, you have misunderstood what they mean. `highway=` is traditional British English meaning "public road", and is simply used for any road for legacy reasons. `=construction` means to be constructed, not roads for construction activities, nor necessarily existing already.

OSM doesn't serve short-term data either. Drawing and tracking such temporary roads should be avoided in the first place. It's not a construction site mangement software. The timeframe is they should exist on the order of months.

Please don't casually claim others are "blabbing" when you start by deleting many data without having understood how things works here. You have very surprisingly misunderstood what `=construction` means. It doesn't mean roads for construction, but roads to be constructed. As mentioned before, if it's not yet constructed, it should only be changed to `proposed:highway=` , not deleted.