Ce changement a indroduit un error de géométrie. Je l'ai corrigé.
changeset/153315409

Quel type de problème? On a utilisé les crossings de vélo partout à la carte sans problème. Ça ne fait pas de sens de le changer. Maintenant il manque d'information.

Welcome to OSM, and thanks for updating! The sign was hidden when I did my survey, so I fell back on what I could find on a search engine.

Missclick: description should be "Added street furniture, POIs"

@ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy m'a le montré

I was on site and can verify that there is an overhang. The entrance nodes are currently attached to those instead of the wall of the building itself. I do not have the photos anymore because that phone spontaneously died, but you can see on Mapillary.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=639009321465902&focus=photo&lat=45.488949788333&lng=-73.583866526667&z=17

The geometry of the ice rink was based on a site survey I did. It should probably be reverted.

Also, I think the entrance nodes for the Metro were in the correct spot before? The parts they're connected to now are just overhanging roofs.

Bienvenue à OSM, et merci d'avoir contribué! :)

Hey, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for contributing! I moved that one crosswalk back in place for you, no harm done. :) changeset/151969273

If you decide to do any drawing or moving of stuff like buildings or roads in the future, please check out the wiki page below. We use a specific offset in Montréal, and it's important that everyone use the same number or stuff ends up misaligned. For adding points of interest like you've been doing, it's not super important. osm.wiki/Montr%C3%A9al

If you have any questions, feel free to message me!

This changeset introduced geometry errors to two ways. I have fixed this.

changeset/151725163

J'ai trouvé un outil que pourrait t'intéresser: https://github.com/Beakerboy/OSMBuilding

Peut-être un image peut m'aider expliquer. Vous avez dessiné le clocheton à un offset different que le bâtiment.

https://i.imgur.com/0kXjc3Y.png
https://i.imgur.com/ejGVhX6.png

Il y a des bâtiments qui ne sont pas à 0.6,-1.54 — surtout les imports de CanVec — mas le plupart des bâtiments à Montréal sont alignés à 0.6,-1.54, donc c'est important d'utiliser la même offset. Quand je trouve un bâtiment mal aligné, je le corrige pour que ce soit aligné avec la reste de la carte. Cela était ajouté il y a 12 ans, donc c'est probable qu'il faut le réaligner.

J'ai voulu t'en parler avant que vous fassiez beaucoup de travail mal aligné. Je m'excuse si je n'étais pas clair·e. :)

Bonjour! SVP, si vous utilisez les images ariennes de Bing, changez le "offset" à 0.6,-1.54 pour que vos contributions seront alignées sur celles des autres contributeurs.

Merci pour vos contributions!

osm.wiki/Montr%C3%A9al

"Each parking area feature should be mapped as a contiguous area. [...] Individual parking rows should not be mapped as separate parking areas. To get that level of detail, individual parking spaces can be mapped separately with amenity=parking_space."
amenity=parking

If you put a note on each of them, I can try to confirm the ones in my area while I'm out. :)

By chance did this remove the ones that no longer exist? I've wondered in the past if there was any easy way to keep these updated, given that they move them so often.

When you do these, perhaps please check that you are realigning the elements correctly if you move them. We use an offset of 0.6,-1.54 for Bing imagery here, and your edit misaligned this feature. I have fixed it

It's the OpenSidewalks standard.

https://github.com/OpenSidewalks/OpenSidewalks-Schema/blob/32dad18bb303289f660fd8d26f02f5e301d0a9d1/OpenSidewalks_Mapping_Guide_P1.pdf

If a short footway is not used to divide the curb node from the sidewalk centerline, then the router interprets the user as needing to navigate a curb in order to go around a corner, when this is not the case in reality. This doesn't impact routing for most users, but it is necessary for routing for users with mobility concerns.

As for the naming, in my tests, short enough segments of footway are ignored in TTS routing instructions, so their lack of names hasn't presented a problem. Giving sidewalk segments names at all seems to be a divisive topic (since the sidewalk itself isn't inherently named "Rue Sherbrooke Est," for example, it's merely associated with the street of that name,) but having the names on the main segments has produced good routing directions in all my tests.

Reverted cycle path

changeset/147877420

I have reverted this change, based on updated imagery.

changeset/147877403