收到了你的建议，谢谢。待全线通车后我会再对其进行一次 survey，届时更新 'name'信息

(才看到你的 changeset comment，抱歉。)

你说得有道理。但是，OSM 数据最终有一部分是面向普通用户的，在国人的认知中“高铁”比“高速线”更能表达实际的作用，“高速线”会产生歧义 (毕竟这不是一条高速公路)，而有歧义的名称应该放 'alt_name' 而不是 'name' 挂在地图上

我在 2025/11/4 进行了一次实地考察，发现沿途标注的都是类似于 “‘西渝高铁’大竹段” 这种，没有一处写着 “西渝高速线”。因此，'name' 标 “西渝高铁” 更合适 (Ground Truth)。

我认为，保持目前的标注更合适：
- alt_name → 西渝高速线
- name → 西渝高铁
- official_name → 西渝高速铁路

你觉得呢？期待您的看法。

已经在 #171900669 这个 changeset 里面批量添加了

zh_CN:
嘿，Kiana_Kaslana 你好！我注意到了您在大竹县绘制的绕城 "construction=trunk" 和 "construction=secondary" 路，看起来精度不错，但是这条路目前在吉林一号和天地图的卫星图上均不可见。我十分好奇，想请问一下绘制这条道路的时候，您是通过何种数据源进行测绘的？GPS 轨迹文件？还是政府公开的规划文件？再次感谢您的卓越贡献！

en_US (translated by AI):
Hi, Kiana_Kaslana! I noticed your great work on the new trunk & secondary road in Dazhu County. The alignment is very accurate! It's not visible on the latest Jilin-1 or Tianditu imagery I have. I was very curious, what source did you use for mapping it? Was it a GPS trace or perhaps some public planning documents? Thanks for your excellent contribution!

Hey bro, thanks for correcting my tag spelling mistake!

Without your correction, I might not have known for a long time that my 'operator' tag was wrong (JOSM does not warn about tag spelling mistakes because it considers it a custom tag)...

Fixed: Changeset #164603080 (used Vespucci because included other edits)

Your suggestion looks good. I will fix this later using the Java OpenStreetMap editor on Arch Linux.
Thank you very much for your suggestion! I'll send you the changeset ID when I'm done editing.

*I'm not sure if I can use markdown here, but using markdown makes it better to insert citation links, so I'll use markdown for the following*

Thank you for your thorough review. I'd like to provide some additional context regarding the emergency service capabilities of this disease prevention center:

1. **Primary Function**
This facility's main focus is on preventive healthcare, including vaccinations and health screenings. It doesn't offer comprehensive medical treatment. I've used the `clinic` designation to reflect its outpatient nature, in line with established healthcare mapping guidelines.

2. **Emergency Response**
The center plays a crucial role in addressing public health emergencies, such as epidemic outbreaks or biosecurity incidents. This aligns with the mandated emergency response functions of China's CDC, as outlined in relevant public health legislation.

3. **Medical Emergencies**
It's important to note that this facility is not equipped to handle acute medical emergencies like trauma cases or heart attacks. These situations are managed by nearby hospitals with appropriate emergency departments.

To more accurately represent the center's functions and avoid potential misunderstandings, I propose the following tag adjustments:

```osm
amenity = clinic
healthcare = centre
healthcare:facility = disease_prevention_center
emergency:public_health = yes
description = Specializes in public health emergencies (e.g., epidemic control, biosafety incidents). Not equipped for medical emergencies.
```

I've removed the general `emergency=yes` tag to prevent any broad misinterpretation of the center's capabilities.

For further reference, I've consulted established guidelines on emergency services tagging, WHO classifications of health facility types, and the official functional specifications of China's CDC.

I believe these changes more accurately convey the center's specialized role in public health emergencies. Your thoughts on these proposed adjustments would be greatly appreciated.