Aqui no hay parada.

Por que você o rotulou como não pavimentado? Por exemplo, a Rua Peru está pavimentada há pelo menos 30 anos, cheia de poços e é melhor não andar nela, mas pavimentada.

The coastline sould be mapped where it should , not where it use to be, if the software is broken fix the software, but the data sould be right.

There are users who use the coastline for rendering (although they do not have the nobility to recognize it) and they care less that the data is used to determine what is ocean and what is not, as shown by the various examples of the coastline mapped tens of kilometers within England or Germany.

They are just tagging the coastline for the renderer!!! JUST FIX THE RENDERER!!! The OSM is data, not a renderer image for the web. Render is one of the uses of the data, but it is not the only only one, nor the most important, but they fails to understand that, and they continue to insist on moving the coastline, as they did with the Rio de la Plata and it is currently very poorly mapped.

The question about what is ocean and what is not is a basic question that OSM data cannot answer with the natural=coastline that some people insist.

I suffered the same fact with the armchair mapping in Rio de la Plata, seems that the local mapper knowledge is less valuable than the opinion of these people. This is a fact right now. The problem has more than one year now.

I'm still waiting since July to see the DWG position on this issue.

This is not the use case documented in the wiki for foot=no.

For discourage access maybe you can use
foot=discouraged or something like that, but foot=no means that a pedestrian have no right to walk there, which in no way is the case in the changesets i was refering to.

Please fix them.

Thanks.

Hi.

What is the source for this changeset and all your recent changes that add foot=no to ways?

Are you able to see this fact by looking at aerial imagery (source tag of the changesets)?

FYK IDE.uy has aerial images of Montevideo from March 2020, they are with low resolution but this kind of things are clearly visible,

See changeset/78417990#map=17/-34.92700/-56.16476
Like this there are a lot of changes in Montevideo, that become useless if you mistakenly draw it again.

Hi. Pleae don't use aerial imagery from 2018-2019 to this kind of changes. This (and a lot of other) connections were removed to improve security.

Why the f did you this!!!!!

You should not do changes based on imagery that is older than the changes!!!!

Hola.
Por favor indica que fuente usaste para agregar este elemento.
Gracias.

Thank you. Yes, .admin_level=8 was a mistake that i just saw today.

protect_class=26 is documented in the wiki. protect=* class as "Historic: for colonial-era entities and protectorates...".
The wiki is wrong?

Hi. Please explain your changes. of
heritage=1 to 8 (1 is for world heritage)
and the deletion of protect_class=26

Hi. You "fix" for the Historic Quarter of the City of Colonia del Sacramento is wrong. The admin_level is 1, not 8, beacause is world heritage.

Hola. Gracias por los aportes.

En "name" solo se pone el nombre actual de la calle. Si es de interés mantener el nombre viejo se pone en la etiqueta "old_name".

Hola. No se usa el prefijo "Calle" en Uruguay, salvo pocas excepciones, y esta no es una de ellas.

Hola. Gracias por las colaboraciones.

Tene cuidado porque algun error hay en como estas mapeando las alturas, que las lineas de interpolacion quedaron como calles desconectadas.

Hola.

Los poligonos de las plazas se dibujan en el perimetro de la plaza, no hay que pegarlos a las vias que representan el eje de calle.

why did you do this change?

Hola. La foto muestra que hay edificaciones ahi, no una plaza. ¿Demolieron las edificaciones y construyeron una plaza?