Hey, I am wondering if it is really helpful to classify these as "trunk roads". Yes, they are national roads, but in the DRC that does - in many cases - not mean that the roads are even usbale without a 4x4 vehicle. Especially the RN9 has as far as I know never been maintained.

This is definitely not a secondary road! Please read highway=* to learn how to use the highway key!

This is definitely not a secondary road! Please read highway=* to learn how to use the highway key!

This is definitely not a secondary road! Please read highway=* to learn how to use the highway key!

This changeset apparently "deleted" the park (probably a hole in the relation or something). Please fix.

Alles klar, danke!

Hi, ich habe gesehen, dass du diverse Wege in der Schönholzer Heide mit "bicycles=no" getaggt hast. Gibt's dafür eine rechtliche Grundlage oder worauf basiert das? Immerhin fahren da tagtäglich Leute auf Fahrrädern lang...

Hi, I've already been contacted by other mappers about my mapping style. Some years ago, I had been told by another mapper that "double parallel lines" should be avoided at all cost, so I got used to using relations for nearly all kinds of areas. I never realized (until now) that this way of mapping is pretty difficult for other mappers to retrace or to follow. I'll make some changed to my edits, trying to simplify things a little bit.

Danke für die ausführliche Antwort. Ich schreibe dir ggf. nochmal eine PM mit weiteren Fragen, weil ich mir jetzt nicht mehr ganz sicher bin, wie ich bestimmte "areas" dann mappen soll. Schonmal als Vorwarnung: Wenn du MPs nicht magst, wirst du bei meinen anderen Edits erst recht die Krise kriegen. Ich höre jetzt erstmal mit dem Mapping auf, bis ich Klarheit habe. Sorry für die Umstände.

Da scheiden sich wohl die Geister. Als ich vor ein par Jahren noch ohne MPs gemappt habe, kamen gleich die Nachrichten à la: "Uahh, bitte überschneidende Linien unbedingt vermeiden, MPs benutzen!". Jetzt nutze ich MPs und mache es natürlich wieder nicht allen recht. Was wäre denn "best practice"?

Tracks cannot be verified by sat imagery

Cannot verify those track in any way.

Wrong classification. This is not a highway. Ce n'est pas une autoroute!

Wrong classification. This is not a highway. Ce n'est pas une autoroute!

Hi, as a fellow mapper who has visited the area; the lines that the AI found should rather be classified as paths, not as unmaintained track roads. The majority of them are small paths used by locals, they are not used by any vehicles (and could not be used by any, either.)

This changeset deleted a major connecting road (highway=unclassified): ID: 406746301, in Changeset #73242657

This change should be undone or the road remapped by the responsible author!

Hi mbranco2,

I am very surprised that this line is suddenly assigned to my changeset. I have not added this line, however I 'touched' it multiple times during editing. As far as I could see someone put it to mark areas which do not have sattelite imagery coverage. However, this has changed some months ago when new Bing images were added. I guess this line can be deleted without any problems.

Kind regards!

No problem, I see what mistakes I did. However, those areas were mapped by me almost one year ago and I can assure you that my "mapping style" has changed, especially now that I was made aware of the complications. I'm currently reworking all the super-huge areas starting from the south of Gungu town, but it takes a lot of time since I try to keep the best level of detail the sattelite imagery offers.

Thanks for letting me know!

As you are not the only one who has recently contacted me about my edits, I assume that I've been flagged somewhere. Maybe you could leave them a comment that I am aware of the issues and will fix them as soon as time allowes.

Have a nice day,

ian727

I'm aware of the problem being shown in your link and I am not using this method anymore in my recent edits. The whole area will be re-mapped since I consider my old edits to be un-accurate - and, like you pointed out, mapped in a wrong way.

I do not see what you mean by "Never connect areas with roads"; does it refer to the problem you pointed out with the link? Or is it another issue? Why should areas not be connected to roads? You can find areas connected to roads in OSM all over the world.

I'll gladly listen to any advice to improve my way(s) of mapping.

Cheers,

ian727

Please do not classify residential dirt tracks as "tertiary highway". That's confusing and wrong, please check the OSM wiki for further information on how to classify roads/tracks.

Thank you.