This was a validation cleanup changeset. I repaired serious mapping errors and cleaned up existing mapping during the validation step, which is my normal practice of cleaning up sloppy & incomplete mapping. This is how I help HOT.

Do not leave comments here about "slowing down validation" or "you don't need to map that" other myopic things I don't need to hear about.

some buildings are pasted copies that are very large and don't seem to accurately reflect the building footprints.

I don’t think you should have started it at all.

- I didn’t slow down your validation - I was the one validating.
- I was mapping as I normally do, which was not unusual.
- I was mapping as I thought was helpful to the HOT task - not the bare minimum required. Apparently this is absolutely forbidden.

- I was validating large sections and cleaning up other mapper’s errors as well. I thought this was helpful.

But drawing some waterways is a big deal and somehow worthy of your time to comment.

I don’t want to be around such micro-managers.

When you type “regards,” I don’t think you have considered that the *only* actual communication from a project lead I have ever received HOT mapping has been a complaint - about mapping too many useful things.

*sigh*

- the barriers are walls around grouped structures. This makes them easier to identify when these HOT maps are printed out (which seems to be a common way I see them used)
- waterways are barriers to access. I know with floods there is water everywhere, but canals and water features are even more of a barrier to any effort to reach the structure. These present barriers to rural access - so many roads stop and do not connect across them.

- waterways help others map bridges accurately accurate bridges are absolutely necessary. So many bridges are missing.

- I map tracks where I see the ways as tracks. These tracks are often the “driveways” for these remote structures. Mapping everything as a minor road causes clutter and confusion.

I map in rural Japan, and access to remote farming structures in the middle of a wide irrigation system is confusing and difficult if mapped badly.

I am the one validating. As of 6 hrs ago I am the #1 validator on the project. I clean up and add these additional features to ensure that it is mapped to the minimal standard to my tastes *usually* during my validation.

***this is the way that I feel I am helping these people***

- I am aware that I don’t always follow the letter of the rules for HOT mapping, but I am following the spirit of HOT mapping in general. I am helping in the way I feel is useful, and that help is not slowing your validation or other mapping efforts.

Please stop and consider your words and statements more carefully in the future. I think your positions are unreasonable or untrue.

-Javbw

disconnected footways. needs repair.

great job mapping the farmland!

This changeset, like other mapping in the area, is full of disconnected sidewalks and waterways. they should be connected or deleted. if they are not connected properly, they are useless ways merely decorating the tile renders, but not useful as OSM mapping data.

I am repairing ways along the levees and a few sidewalks and other major ped footpaths in the area after cycling surveys. the others need repair. refer to Japan GSI layers for proper alignment and Maxar / Bing for new changes.

There are very crude polygons here.

please use "Q" to sQuare your buildings.

yep - the wirefarme shortcut in iD is "w" - and I accidently stick it on things. Thanks for catching this one!

the more I look, the more bad mapping I find. Please do not edit any cycleways or pedestrian paths.

This entire changeset should be reverted.

Do not map cycleways as paths.

There must be a tag of some sort, because the road signs make the legal distinction.

Here’s some pictures and further description

The width is a physical barrier, (usually with huge concrete chokers to keep 5 ton trucks from trying to sneak into somewhere they shouldn’t), but all of the tags I am adding are signed legal restrictions - they are signed with common road signs (and amendment /exception signs below them) present everywhere in Japan. They are standard and mass produced, so I assume they have a common national road law behind their implementation. Regardless, the access restrictions are signed by the city/prefecture, so it is a mappable trait not dependent on width. Width is hard to catch while cycling 😉

Here are some pics of two kinds of these narrow mixed access grade crossings, a “small and special okay” and two other “2-wheel only” crossings present on the Tobu & Jomo lines here in Kiryu on my way home. I just took them for this post:

https://imgur.com/a/l7FRYcs

- regular crossing - no restrictions.
- no HGV/bus access (small “no truck/bus” sign)
This is traffic control to keep dumpers out or the route has turns that large vehicles cannot turn on the other side.
- no “regular cars” - a “no motorcar” sign is present, but the “small and special” tag is amended: this is very common for narrow farming lane crossings to allow kei trucks, small tractors (most are small), and locals on bikes to cross in a continent spot while keeping other traffic on larger roads with larger crossings. The road grade is often poor, sometimes an narrow alley on one side and a track on the other - no place to pass or other affordances exist. Locals move around on narrow farming roads that cross and tunnel under major roads that most people can’t access - keeping the tractors and tracked rice planters from causing major traffic jams on arterial roads or narrow local routes.

There are hundreds of these types of crossing in each prefecture.

- no motorcar, bollard/post present, “2 wheels” excepted (scooters): ped/ bicycle/ scooter access.

Ped only: rare - only foot and bikes : Often has a cycle barrier to force dismount/caution - and stop scooters - not to actually prevent bicycle access. This is to keep noisy bikes from taking shortcuts around signals/traffic in some places.

- ped only - no bicycles either, as the crossing has stairs to access it on one end, and more convenient crossings exist for bikes - pretty dang rare. I have only seen one or two.

I made it up on the spot because the signs don't say "kei car" (軽自動車) which is a class of vehicle for tax purposes , they say "small special vehicles exempted." ( 小特除く ). I was planning to use it on other similar crossings. These tiny grade crossings that are not purposefully for pedestrians (they would have a bollard or be ~1M wide) are for local access for tractors and kei trucks to avoid having to go the long way around, yet narrow enough to physically restrict most vehicles wider than a regular sedan (so all white-plate regular cars are legally restricted). Other narrow crossings have chokers in place to stop HGV from taking shortcuts on roads they can't fit on (or are a bother), but are wide enough for regular vehicles, like the two just to the east of this one. I have now changed the access on this port to kei=yes and agricultural=designated.

Still finding garbage data.

This changeset should be deleted.

level crossing points points are disconnected from the railways and all should be deleted.

The ones in my area are all duplicates as well, and unnecessary.

bad mapping of the cycleway. deleted and redrew. wrong side of the street and missed many crossing roads.

No, it was on purpose.

It’s a possible tag or a placeholder until I find the right one.

I added it because I needed to look up how to tag “小” vehicles.

A lot of the train crossings ban:
- HGV
- “Cars” (but small kei vehicles okay)
- motor_vehicles entirely (Via bollards)

I used kei= as a Placeholder in this case.

If I can’t get a proper access tag, I will propose “kei” as an access tag for Japanese tagging.

Javbw

thanks for the mistake correction!

this changeset includes very badly mapped sidewalks.