Hi Spring Dream - just want to verify the name:en tag 'Oke Shit Kone.' Is this the proper English name for the community? Thank you so much

Hello,

We were looking for cases that might need annotation, but our query had a bug which resulted in bringing in roads located in Belgium. If necessary, we're happy to revert these changes. Please let us know how to proceed.

Thank you again, and happy mapping.

Hi osminng - Hope you are doing well. Some of your edits are creating duplicate ways. For example, way/340181893 and way/857933717. This returns a validation error in Josm "Duplicated Ways." Please take a closer look at some of your recent edits to make sure they are not creating these duplications. Happy mapping and have a great day.

Adding to the discussion here for more context. The OSM wiki for unmarked crossings states, "Some states have laws that establish an implied crossing on every side of every intersection by default[1] or wherever one is implied by a sidewalk flanking the intersection,[2] unless otherwise prohibited by a regulatory sign. This can technically result in very unsafe crossings that most people would not recognize as crossings, such as across a busy four-lane road without any pedestrian infrastructure. It would be reasonable to omit such crossings in favor of safer ones." This edit seems to align with the OSM wiki. Please feel free to add to the discussion! We are open to feedback and happy to revert if others feel that this should remain an unmarked crossing.

I am interested in hearing what others may think of way/1231885078. The OSM wiki on crossing = unmarked gives an example of a busy 4-lane road. It states that it is reasonable to omit the crossing = unmarked tag because it would be dangerous for some to cross here (even if legally acceptable). I understand that this is technically a legal crossing, but would this be an acceptable instance where crossing = informal or informal = yes should be applied? For reference, "Some states have laws that establish an implied crossing on every side of every intersection by default[1] or wherever one is implied by a sidewalk flanking the intersection,[2] unless otherwise prohibited by a regulatory sign. This can technically result in very unsafe crossings that most people would not recognize as crossings, such as across a busy four-lane road without any pedestrian infrastructure. It would be reasonable to omit such crossings in favor of safer ones." crossing=unmarked

[continued from original comment on changeset] Updated the crossings to unmarked based on helpful feedback from community. In Seattle, when the sidewalks extend all the way to the end of the curb like in this changeset, this is both a legal crossing and the designated pedestrian infrastructure for the crossing.

Thank you for the update on this one. Please feel free to message me if there are similar instances where there is a prolongation or connection of the farthest sidewalk line. We'll fix it by copying the syntax you used in this one.

Hi MatthewAndersonUS80! Thank you for your contributions to OSM. When adding coastline ways, the direction of the way should be counter clockwise: natural=coastline. Also, can you provide more insight on the line = yes tag used on many of the coastline ways? Thank you and looking forward to hearing from you!

Hi Kavithaptpm! Thank you for your OSM contributions. way/1120516120 and 1054630233 are not closed and break relation/241509. I have some ideas on how to fix it, but I wanted to reach out to you first in case you have a preferred solution you would rather apply. Thank you!

Unable to verify Suphai Island in Bing, Esri World Imagery, Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta, Mapbox Satellite, or Maxar Premium Imagery. Reached out to the original editor for verification, but no response. If this delete is an error, please revert the changeset and indicate the imagery used to verify the islet. This helps increase provenance. Thank you!

Hi dru1138,
I've taken a look at the coastline way/1104213497. The sandy beach area intersects the coastline way, and the bare rock area does not accurately match aerial imagery. What source was used to digitize these features? Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you!

Hello dededaj158,

Thank you for your edit. I am unable to find Suphai Island. What source was used for this edit? Looking forward to hearing from you.

Hello Kensou023,

I saw that you had made several edits in this area. Some of these objects that were digitized spelled out a word, a drawing of a Pokemon, and a heart shaped lake. These features were removed as they do not match any available imagery set in OSM. May I ask what you based these edits off of?

Thank you for your time.

Hi Matthew! Can you explain the purpose of Way: 146018637? Thank you so much!

Hi Dourven,

Based on the BDOrtho IGN this is not an islet. Can you explain the tagging of this feature? Thank you so much!

Hello Ahmed,
Nubia is used in the alt_name:es tag. Is this the same as Nuba? Looking forward to hearing back from you.

Can the entire island have tag landuse=industrial (way: 1075297891)? If so, way: 1075297892 could be deleted.

Thank you Alessandro for the update.

Thank you for the update. Greatly appreciated!

Please check the orientation of your coastline ways. Some of them are clockwise, and they should be counterclockwise. More information about coastlines can be found here under "How to enter the data": natural=coastline