I changed it because i thought that highway=ladder is not a valid tag.

Hi,
I see that the previous version were more corect (aluminium ladder). Could you please change it to that?
Thanks

Edit comment of changeset to: "Disused shop #mapycz"

I see you already fixed it (also removed the wd). Thank you a lot.
V

Hi, thanks for explanation. It was caused by the wrong wikidata (Wd of the main peak), which confused me. I will fix it.
Regards

Thanks,
my question is what to do next time (when I find somethink is not correctly marked)? Is there a list of people as you, who can “fix” it? List together with areas of responsibility would be the best.
V

Can you send it to someone to review the situation of marking? If not, just tell me. Thx
V

Hi,
I changed it to highway=path and trail_visibility=no.
Details: User reports that this path (way/1102150845) is not existing, there is also no marking.
If you got someone to forward this issue, please do it. Thanks.
V

Hi,
I know that not all people use Strava. But when looking to those who use, why they don't choose that path?
I also have the report from user, which were on that place and told us, that there is no path.
If you can send it to someone, who will review it and fix it (renew the marking or reroute the marked route) I will be happy when send it to him/her. If not, just tell me, I've got a contact from different part of Italy, but he always helped me (by sending it to someone else, who is reponsible for marking in that area).

I see no reasons for revert, all changes were made according to the evidence (user in terrain and strava).
BR.
V

Hi,
its not as you say, you simplified it too much. I just want to mark as abandoned the path, where our user told that it doesn exist and I verified it on strava. Give yourself a question: why all strava users choose the other path than this one (the one i marked as abandoned)? The obvious solution is that it simply doesnt exist.
Simply: A marked path which is not visible on Strava is suspicious, together with user report, I’m 100 percent sure it is abandoned.
If you can check it in terrain, please do it. It’s always the best solution
V

Hi,
the idea was same. If there is a marked route in OSM (at path A) and Strava says that the nearby path (path B) is used a lot more (actually path A is not used according to strava). This leads to a conclusion, that path B is marked and not path A.
Also it was reported by user, which walked this part of marked route, so I have no doubt about it (reported by user, verified on Strava).
Now I can answer your question: I was not modified based only on Strava but primarly on user report.
Best regards.
V

Hi, we got it reported by our (mapy.cz) users. I checked it on Strava.com Heatmap with this idea: If there is a marked path, at least someone (with Strava) will use it. As there were no Strava.com records, I decided that the path (and definitely not the markings) are there, and thats why I marked it as abandoned.
Best regards.
V

Ok, I understand.
Thanks.

I understand you, but we are mapping reality (not the ideal state of things). And it's as I said (and as the photos says). The better option is to leave it as it is and after the remarking (fixing signs in terrain) change it to reflect the real state.
But do what you think is the best.
V

Hi,
I made those changes, because I have seen those guidepost with R44 on them (node/12536091967, node/12536142713) and this one without marking of hiking route (node/12536142712).
According to those guideposts, the current state of R51 and R44 reflects the reality.
There is no duty to inform any authorities (and there were no info on those relations, that it's ought to do that). Nevertheless, if you got the contact, please inform them. Thanks.

You can see those photos of guideposts here (https://en.mapy.cz/turisticka?x=7.4618195&y=44.3524887&z=16&ovl=2), hope that could help.

Kind regards.
V

Dobrý den, ano souhlasím, že se jedná o silnici první třídy. Prosím o opravu čisla na 3 (místo 603), případně tuto opravu provedu klidně já. Respektujte prosím to, jak je silnice značená ve skutečnosti
V

Dobrý den,
přestaňte prosím nahodile měnit čísla a třídy komunikací (nedávno jste ji změnil na secondary, teď zpět na primary). Varianty jsou dvě: buď je to silnice první třídy (tedy primary s číslem 3, resp. 39) nebo se jedná o silnici druhé třídy (s odpovídajím třímístným číslem).
Do mapy patří realita, nikoliv to jak to bude za pár let nebo měsíců přečíslováno.
Pokud byste k tomuto tématu měl nějaké dotazy, klidně se na mě obraťte, základem je především komunikace.
S pozdravem.
V

Dobrý den,
tato silnice není první třídou. Měla by být tedy značena jako highway=tertiary. Prosím tedy o vrácení do původního stavu.
Díky.
V

V tom případě je to ok. Ale ten Městský okruh je fakt divný. Zmapování je tedy v pořádku, divná je jen realita (ale tu mapujeme ať je jakákoliv).
V

Problém mám především s tímto místem (node/25870420), kde se křižovatka určitě jmenuje Malovanka. A tímto místem (node/683508), kde se křižovatka určitě nejmenuje "Městský okruh"