Again, I always expect Mapillary to have no data at all, at least for Hong Kong.

To clarify, I know "straight" junctions should keep straight. What you may notice about "keep straight" may be because the slip path is short so that the "keep angle" rule forces the short path to be straight all the way (I personally find them ugly).

However what seems unspecified is this kind of "far side slip" junctions.

Ah, good find. Usually turning right does imply "u-turn is allowed".

Will make a todo note for now. The plan is to somehow add e.g. source = mapillary to the turn restriction itself so in the future people will know something is up when they see a source tag.

I have heard about something like this before, but to me it feels more like some sort of artistic discussion. This would be different from e.g. earlier discussed "dashed lines separation".

And, specifically, for this case, I did not know / did not notice where the control box is at.

... ????????

iirc I have never declared my stance on the mapping style of "free ref node"; this is observed to be seemingly a convention.

@kingkingHK You quoted a changeset. To clarify, my comment on that changeset is essentially "that free ref node shouldn't exist because there's no traffic signals at the roundabout". There is no judgement on whether it's good or bad.

At minimum only you @kingkingHK found the "free ref" mapping style to be of poor-quality. I find merits of that style, because now I can very easily know where a specific ref traffic signal is located.

@Kovoschiz mentioned putting the ref at the control box. This is definitely correct as expected from the style of OSM Global, but sometimes we just don't know where that box is, or maybe there are multiple boxes for the same set of signals.

It seems to me, by convention, there should have a single free node that contains the traffic signals ref info, and then several based nodes that actually describes where/how the traffic signals apply.

1. aerial imagery by ESRI and MapBox seem to show a triangle, which indicates a yield sign
2. I was about to say, need not worry too much since soon we will need to map Yuen Long South developments and there will likely be junction upgrades, but I see you have already remade the changeset

info: there is a South Asian (Pakistani?) community here. what probably happens is that during some hours, some of the folks would lay out some shops (usually at Pei Ho Street due to low traffic) and sell homemade stuff and chat among themselves. doesn't feel like a real tourist attraction.

Indeed, this split was not originally made by me. Seeing it is this close to the island, I opt for beautification. This is more on subjective preferences.

Then again, if it were me, there wouldn't be a split at all in the first place; just mark the crossing with "it has a traffic island" and finish. Simple stuff.

osm.wiki/Hong_Kong/Transport/Public_transport

> 至於泊街的巴士總站（有調度功能），[...]
> For a roadside terminus (with operation arrangement ability) [...]

does that count?

also, you never know, some pages at HKBusFandom doesn't have much OSM integration, while some other pages have very strong integration. I believe their side works similar to this side.

note/5151410

Resolved via changeset/177966709

I think I want house=terraced ; see the extra d

idk, my criteria for semi-detached is "only one side connects to separating walls". If we have both sides touching the separating walls, then we cannot distinguish them from regular rowhouses other than "aerial imagery says this rowhouse chain only contains 2 houses".

Re node/10213715620 , I see no other alternatives. If we make that a free node then it's ambiguous whether it is accessible via way/1116751169 or way/1122598161 .

This very nicely leads to the second part of the question. Actually, way/1122598161 is slightly vertically sloped, so below the footpath is the government office node/10213715620 , and the entire bus terminus walkway.

OK, there's probably some misunderstanding.

Procedurally, there was a complaint about "60kmh". I went and checked that there was a "50kmh" sign nearby, which was then used to fix this issue. Thus, the issue was resolved.

Conceptually, OSM is a data crowdsourcing project, so it is unreasonable to expect all edits to be of high quality and perfect. What usually happens is that I (or countless others) made an OK-ish edit, and then someone else (esp e.g. Kovoschiz) improved upon it. The tendency of this kind of system is volume/scale, not quality.

Philosophically, due to the crowdsourcing nature, I adopt the mindset of continuous improvement. OSM data can almost always be improved, depending on how far you want to go. Replacing the "60kmh" fake news with a "50kmh all the way" style issue is already an improvement. Further improvement may be sought if the community has such capacity and will.

We can always review the entire stuff later. I think I may have accidentally championed something new against my wishes. This time it's highway exits.

That aside, OSM is decentralized in nature. I appreciate the guidance throughout the years, but the wiki is not a "strict rulebook", but more like "we usually do it like this". Either the wiki is incomplete, or I do not participate OSM enough to know that a certain topic actually has a wiki page for it, or there are new situations that requires wiki updates.

OSM wiki explains for "disused"/"abandoned" is whether the thing is "significant". Their example includes, e.g., disused/abandoned comms tower. As long as these are not demolished, these should get separate "disused"/"abandoned" tag.

Then, one may infer/feel a relevant factor is "whether I can look at it and locate it". A disused tower can still be located as a generic tower from a distance. Here is urban area, I can look at it through the glass at Exit C and locate it, and also the unassuming late-add plantations at Exit D1 and locate it. This abandoned tunnel is still gonna be here for hopefully 50 years or more.

Why didn't I do that for the rural paths? Trees grow fast, I don't think I can see those paths anymore.

Not troll-tagging. It do be like that. See:

https://www.td.gov.hk/en/traffic_notices/index_id_77015.html

It's not demolished, and it's not repurposed. Just abandoned, but not "abandon by damage". Not your usual kind of abandoned stuff in the usual OSM lifecycle.

My private guess is "too many hobos".