way/764238133
way/680435805
hopefully not a taskingmanager problem

Hi,
way/713937120
is in reality a dry riverbed. You should reverse its direction. It should be tagged as "waterway=stream" + "seasonal=yes". You may also consider to extend this waterway to the lower end of the dam
way/715870083
The dam(reservoir) is "natural=water" + water=reservoir.
As long as you are the only mapper in this forgotten project you are not bound to tile borders. It would make much more sense to draw all ways from one end to another. Do not map every little path because these might only be temporary. Do not map very short roads (driveways) because they are not necessary for a rout able map.

Hi,
Wouldn't "place=village" instead of "amenity=community"_centre be more suitable?

@ VJudge,
you have improved the alignment of the existing way.
node/7114681161/history
That's perfectly all right.
I am also not a team member :)

Hi tony_hny,
not a big deal.
I decided not to map this part as a dual carriage way in order to match the situation on the ground. U turns should have been possible on both end nodes of way/706542462, where it was connected to the dual carriage ways. But it depends on the respective navigation system how it handles the situation.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-19.768178055555556&lng=34.88212305555555&z=17&pKey=QODkE5SUhrj-Tw7yNvtllw&focus=photo
Link? - not sure, but somehow it could work like this too.

Ah i guess i see what you mean. But at node [node/281618821] you may still have a problem.
osm.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_car&route=-17.84593%2C31.03658%3B-17.84558%2C31.03656#map=19/-17.84578/31.03629
To avoid this I do often set "only_straight_on" or "no_u_turn" restrictions on those points .

Hi Snehit Tadepall,
sorry i missed that comment. Are you suggesting to split up more roads? As far as i know it is still recommended to split roads only if the are physically divided. Like it was also done the linked example.
Btw. do you have the "lane and roads attributes" paint style activated? You find it in Josm under the View tab.

Hello,
This tool might interest you
https://ahorn.lima-city.de/tr/?zoom=19&lat=-17.845582&lon=31.036374&layer=Grayscale&overlays=TTT

relation/6416450 was most likely meant as a administrative boundary. You turned it into a circulating river. please have a look

I'd test the available sources. If you pan around, you might find a construction site that could already be finished on the more recent layer. When you compare bing and Maxar, you see that the area in Maxar looks much more developed. This could be an indication that the Maxar image is much more recent. To contact the project manager, select the Question and Comment tab in the Tasking Manager.

Hi,
use Maxar instead of bing!
Before start remote mapping you should always determine the most recent imagery.
If necessary ask the project manager to change the Imagery source for this Project.

hi,
please check -

still needed but not correct:

relation/9423974
via=https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6355333877

relation/9423975
via=https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3339575843

unnecessary:

relation/9423976

Hi Musicpen,
thanks for the correction.
Even the most recent imagery is outdated :).
So let's wait and see what Patroclus has to say.

Some are vehicles, some might be kiosks or sheds.
Toggle between different imagery sources to identify permanent structures.
Btw. Maxar should be the most recent layer.
This means the task instructions are probably outdated. Some of the tracks you added or modified are not visible any more

Hi, this note is related to your changes in Harare. Please check.
note/1977209

Gut gemacht.
Fehlermeldung bitte noch schliessen
note/1908492
Die Kreisstraße sollte als ref nur mit K57 getaggt werden. Zusätzlich kannst du den Straßennahmen mit name=Offenbacher Straße setzen. Bitte noch beachten das hier in Deutschland, anders als in der Schweiz, Straße immer mit Eszett geschrieben wird.
Gruß Ralf

relation/9346775

should be removed?

Hi,
Is FB Maxar identical to the OSM Maxar Layer?

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-de/2019-October/116427.html