Hi,

Thanks for reviewing the edit and apologies for the delayed response. Here tha tag should be HGV not HMV. Its a mistake from ourside. I have changed it to HGV=no.

Thanks for the review again.

(on behalf of anurasi)

Hi robert,

Thanks for adding the name and apologies for the delayed response. We are always happy to engage with the OSM community.

(on behalf of anurasi)

Hi,

Thanks for reviewing the edit and apologies for the delayed response. The edit was made immediately after receiving the comment from your end but missed to reply back.
(commenting on behalf of redgnana)

Hi,

Apologies for the delayed response. Going forward we will follow your suggestions

Regards,
yaswap

Hi,

Thanks for the updates jmapb. We will follow your suggestion.

Regards,
yaswap

Hi,

Thanks for the suggestion. We will discuss about this with our leadership if there is any blocker on doing so.

Thanks for the suggestion again.

Regards,
yaswap

Hi,

Thanks for reviewing the edit and making the changes. We apologize for the delayed response.

We are always happy to engage with the OSM community.(commenting on behalf of the editor)

Regards,
yaswap

Hi Paul Johnson,

Thanks for looking into the edit. The name was given as per the tiger data. Please suggest which has to be prioritized name="County Road 2972" or ref="CR 2972". As per the naming convention adding name is fine.But do let us know if we are going anything wrong.

We are always happy to engage with the OSM community.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi,

Thanks for looking into the edit. The editor added turn-restriction which was the main edit. The node might have got added/modified mistakenly while dragging the map. We will take care of these kind of edits and make sure of not changing the alignment of the existing road segments going forward. I have modified the road to the previous state. Please let us know if anything has to be changed in the edit.

We are always happy to engage with the OSM community.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi,

Thanks for looking into the edit. We added the data as per the OS data. But yes, the same road name was already added to the secondary road on the left. The name of the street that was added could be different.Thanks for editing it. We always trust the local edits over remote sources.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi,

Thanks for looking into the edit. We didn't have an updated imagery when the edit was made. Now we are adding the roads as per the latest aerial image. Thanks again for the review.

We are always happy to engage with the OSM community.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi Phil,

Can't we just add a highway=turning_loop at the point/at the end of the road? Instead of adding a road segment (loop)?

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi,

We modified the edit as per your suggestion. Thanks for reviewing.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi Phil,

Thanks for looking into the edit. The editor might have got confused between the mini roundabout and turning loop/island. The OSM wiki states that if there is any non-traversable feature at the center of the turning loop we may add turning island if it is a not connecting highways and round about if it connect highways. We are removing the data added. Please suggest whether we can add the Turning Island as per the wiki (highway=turning_circle and osm.wiki/Traversable) or is there any different rule in this region.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi Phil,

Thanks for looking into the edit. The edit was made based on the aerial imagery available. But yes, the whole segment is not a paved track. Thanks for editing it. The editor might have missed splitting the segment before changing the Highway tag. We will take care of these kind of edits going forward.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi,

Thanks for looking into the edit. We will make the changes as per your suggestion. The editor might have turned off the paths feature. We will make sure that these errors wont get repeated going forward.
And also the id editor we are using is older one causing this issue. We will fix this soon. Thanks for the review again.

We are always happy to engage with the OSM community.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi Phil,

Thanks for looking into the edit. We noticed that the ID errors are not showing up for us as it is an older version of id editor(2.12.2) that we used. But still the editor should have connected the road segment to the footpath. We have escalated for the id editor update. We will make sure that these kind of errors wont get repeated going forward. We will make the changes a per your suggestion.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi,

Thanks for reviewing the edit. Here there is no proof to add Motor vehicle access to the track road. We will revert the edit. We will take care of these kind of edits going forward.

We are always happy to engage with the OSM community.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi,

Thanks for looking into the edit. The editor might have got confused with "Not a through street" sign board. There is no need to add destination tag here. Thanks for correcting it. We will take care of these kind of edits going forward.

We are always happy to engage with the OMS community.

Regards,
yaswap.

Hi,
Thanks for suggesting. We will change the track road to service road. But there are many roads drawn in this area as track roads even though it is not going through fields/forests. Actually adding unpaved to the roads will be correct fix. Once again thanks for the suggestion.

We are always happy to engage with the OSM community.

Regards,
yaswap.