Thanks for noticing that!

Hi! Please could you elaborate how did I broke way/256980852?

My nick is @BrackoNe, but given way is lastly edited by @Shoorick 11 months ago (version 29).

Maybe I did, but please feel free to fix if you know what the issue is, since I do not understand at the first glance for provided way.

Thanks.

Thanks! I appreciate it.

Hey @pavel_shturm!

Thanks for the edits. I am not sure how familiar you are with OSM concepts, but OSM does not tailor data for specific apps.

Directional speed limits are used here because the limit differs in each direction. Please do not add a generic maxspeed tag over these directional limits, as it creates data conflicts.

Please acknowledge this message.

Hi @MountAgou! I tought that I have answered, but I haven't.

Please avoid crossings as you have done in previous edit, and keep more sqaure like junctions when it is possible.

Thanks,
Nemanja

Hey,
Marry Christmas, thanks for reply!

I am not sure that I can recognize any change newer since 1y ago, but given junction looks exactly how it should look.

Maybe I'm overseeing something?

All the best to you too for upcoming holidays.

Hi MountAgou,

Thanks for the reply!

I completely understand what you were saying by mentioning ways way/224100277 and way/1283859123, however, this segment is extremely short and merging in one way for 29 meters it would make more confusion especially it has another flares that connects to 105.

If we would connect into one node, it might reflect a bit closer to reality, but in case of junction with complex turn restriction - it can make us problem.

I would like to ask you to keep it more sqared configuration in such cases, since it doesn't look&feel more off compared to reality, and gives us more freedom in applying any turn restriction.

Please keep in mind this referes only to such X configuration without phisical deviders.

I'm happy to assist you in anything else!

Thanks,
Nemanja

Dear @CanterburyPlain,

hey, it is me again. I can see that many of such junctions is getting "fixed" and I want to make sure to stop such activity. Not in general, but just this with crossing flares.

I noticed that several junctions have been "corrected" by your team recently. Please stop applying these changes. All previous edits of this nature will be reverted.

Junction flares in the middle of a junction should not be mapped as traversable (these should not cross each other) unless there is a physical barrier. I am specifically referring to flares in the center. Please update your guidelines for Serbia and all other countries to ensure such junctions are mapped as 90 degree junctions as they were previously.

Crossing lines/roads is only allowed if there is a physical divider. In those cases, the mapping must reflect that specific physical reality.

I can spend extra time if you want to learn why this approach isn't best practice anywhere and what problems it could cause if you miss (and you are missing it) to add appropriate turn restrictions.

Please confirm that you have read this message and provide an update once your guidelines have been corrected.

Thanks,
Nemanja

Dear @CanterburyPlain,

I noticed that several junctions have been "corrected" by your team recently. Please stop applying these changes. All previous edits of this nature will be reverted.

Junction flares in the middle of a junction should not be mapped as traversable (these should not cross each other) unless there is a physical barrier. I am specifically referring to flares in the center. Please update your guidelines for Serbia and all other countries to ensure such junctions are mapped as 90 degree junctions as they were previously.

Crossing lines/roads is only allowed if there is a physical divider. In those cases, the mapping must reflect that specific physical reality.

I can spend extra time if you want to learn why this approach isn't best practice anywhere and what problems it could cause if you miss (and you are missing it) to add appropriate turn restrictions.

Please confirm that you have read this message and provide an update once your guidelines have been corrected.

Thanks,
Nemanja

Dear @LakeNumto,

It is me again. I want to send you another message that I have noticed that several junctions have been "corrected" by your team recently. Please stop applying these changes. All previous edits of this nature will be reverted.

Junction flares in the middle of a junction should not be mapped as traversable (these should not cross each other) unless there is a physical barrier. I am specifically referring to flares in the center. Please update your guidelines for Serbia and all other countries to ensure such junctions are mapped as 90 degree junctions as they were previously.

Crossing lines/roads is only allowed if there is a physical divider. In those cases, the mapping must reflect that specific physical reality.

I can spend extra time if you want to learn why this approach isn't best practice anywhere and what problems it could cause if you miss (and you are missing it) to add appropriate turn restrictions.

Please confirm that you have read this message and provide an update once your guidelines have been corrected.

Thanks,
Nemanja

Dear @VolgaRiver,

I noticed that several junctions have been "corrected" by your team recently. Please stop applying these changes. All previous edits of this nature will be reverted.

Junction flares in the middle of a junction should not be mapped as traversable (these should not cross each other) unless there is a physical barrier. I am specifically referring to flares in the center. Please update your guidelines for Serbia and all other countries to ensure such junctions are mapped as 90 degree junctions as they were previously.

Crossing lines/roads is only allowed if there is a physical divider. In those cases, the mapping must reflect that specific physical reality.

I can spend extra time if you want to learn why this approach isn't best practice anywhere and what problems it could cause if you miss (and you are missing it) to add appropriate turn restrictions.

Please confirm that you have read this message and provide an update once your guidelines have been corrected.

Thanks,
Nemanja

Dear @LakeNumto,

I noticed that several junctions have been "corrected" by your team recently. Please stop applying these changes. All previous edits of this nature will be reverted.

Junction flares in the middle of a junction should not be mapped as traversable (these should not cross each other) unless there is a physical barrier. I am specifically referring to flares in the center. Please update your guidelines for Serbia and all other countries to ensure such junctions are mapped as 90 degree junctions as they were previously.

Crossing lines/roads is only allowed if there is a physical divider. In those cases, the mapping must reflect that specific physical reality.

I can spend extra time if you want to learn why this approach isn't best practice anywhere and what problems it could cause if you miss (and you are missing it) to add appropriate turn restrictions.

Please confirm that you have read this message and provide an update once your guidelines have been corrected.

Thanks,
Nemanja

Dear @MountAgou,

I noticed that several junctions have been "corrected" by your team recently. Please stop applying these changes. All previous edits of this nature will be reverted.

Junction flares in the middle of a junction should not be mapped as traversable (these should not cross each other) unless there is a physical barrier. I am specifically referring to flares in the center. Please update your guidelines for Serbia and all other countries to ensure such junctions are mapped as 90 degree junctions as they were previously.

Crossing lines/roads is only allowed if there is a physical divider. In those cases, the mapping must reflect that specific physical reality.

I can spend extra time if you want to learn why this approach isn't best practice anywhere and what problems it could cause if you miss (and you are missing it) to add appropriate turn restrictions.

Please confirm that you have read this message and provide an update once your guidelines have been corrected.

Thanks,
Nemanja

Hvala!

Hello! Please could you explain what malicious edit has been done here?

Hello! Please could you explain what malicious edit has been done here?

Hello! Please could you explain what malicious edit has been done here?

Slobodno promeni.
Na južnoj strani je Benu i još jedna.

@MaliMrav - Benu je pored Krešenkovića