I'm not sure that this change, to add junction names to DNCT, makes any sense. This will make sense at Timisoara Est, AFTER the DNCT south has been finalised; but not now, and not for the others, where this is not a (named) EXIT, but it is rather an ordinary at-grade JUNCTION, most of them are roundabouts. This doesn't seem in accordance with the tag functionality (highway=motorway%20junction?uselang=en-US).

Please provide a justification or some other examples where this would be really used like that. Otherwise, please revert.

I definitely support what Kevin says here, and I think this is a bad combination of lack of the local situation, and a lack of the local language (your misinterpretation of "Station" for a tram stop is quite revealing).

Please consult the local community before you do such big changes; it's not that Vienna has very poor OSM coverage of the public transport situation, not at all. If you think something is not according to the standards, please propose what should be changed, and it can be done after a discussion, if deemed correct.

I gave you several examples of motorways in Austria that have only one carriageway, and 2+1 or 2+2 configuration. Maybe you are not aware of it, but mind that A + S are the same in Austria, see e.g. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stra%C3%9Fensystem_in_%C3%96sterreich#Autobahn_und_Schnellstra%C3%9Fe: "Mit der Änderung von 2006 des Bundesstraßengesetzes 1971[7] wurden sämtliche Unterscheidungen von Autobahnen und Schnellstraßen aufgehoben. "

So, the only speciality is that it has an "A" in the name, while the other roads that are legally the same and similar in configuration have an "S" in the name.

I don't think that this justifies a different treatment, but if you think so, then you should consequently change every S road that is tagged as motorway to something else, right?

To give you similar examples, look at M15 (osm.org/#map=12/47.9391/17.2365) or M70 (osm.org/#map=14/46.4894/16.6437) in Hungary - one carriageway, intended (resp. currently upgraded) to full motorway profile, an "M" in the name, tagged not as motorway, because you have no separated carriageway, which is generally regarded as a *key* characteristic of a motorway...

Yes we can talk in German, but I think it makes more sense in English, as this might interest others.

As far as I remember, the Drasenhofen bypass is not signed as motorway, but rather as "Autostraße"; I think the closest equivalent might be the S3 up to Hollabrunn, which is also an Autostraße, and tolled (tolling btw is indicated by an extra tag, toll=*?uselang=en-US), and marked as trunk road. As are most other comparable roads, like S4, S31, ...

I changed your classification of "motorway" back to trunk road. This is *not* a motorway, it is a 1+1 road, w/o separated carriageways.
also, _link segments should be marked as such, NOT as motorway itself.
if you do not like the usage of trunk, then we can discuss using primary, but it certainly doesn't qualify as motorway...

Is it really under construction at the moment? If not (and it is not, it is not even signed yet, right?), then it should not be set as under construction..

you seem to have slightly distorted the alignment on the slip roads, please fix it.

@geocodec:

Dass die Liste nicht genug graphische Möglichkeiten bietet, kann ich verstehen.

Aber wenn du einen Massenimport machst, dann sollte es wohl eher so sein, dass du aktiv das Einverständnis der (lokalen) Community holst.
Wenn die eher auf der Mailing Liste aktiv ist, und du auch explizit darauf verwiesen wurdest, sollte das IMHO nicht mit solchen Argumenten ignoriert werden. Wenn man automatisierte Imports machen kann, dann kann man es auch schaffen, auf der Mailingliste zu diskutieren.

Es sagt ja auch keiner, dass *exklusiv* die Mailingliste verwendet werden muss. Du kannst ja dort hinschreiben, und für die Illustration auf das Forum verweisen. Wo die Diskussion dann fertig geführt wird kann man ja auch noch entscheiden, aber zumindest informieren sollte man auf der Liste auch. Und wenn dort Fragen zum Import aufkommen, dann sollte man die beantworten.

Sorry, ja, der allerletzte Teil ist anscheinend unbeabsichtigt mit reingerutscht, der ist nicht asphaltiert; habe das korrigiert, danke für den Hinweis

Do you have new information on that driving range? Does it still exist? Do you have a new name/website?

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course (corrected for way/423185420)

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course (corrected for way/478060840)

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course (if hthis is actually a mini golf..)

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course; it had the correct tag initially

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course

for minigolf, please use leisure=miniature_golf, not leisure=golf_course; fixed for way/474170179