Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12018-06-28 17:34:34 UTCmuralito Please don't split roads like this. There aren't any phisical separation between both ways.
22018-06-28 18:03:28 UTCgeoJenn You're right. Mapillary shows it too. Thanks for fixing this for me! :)
12018-06-22 02:26:59 UTCmuralito No. This way is no secondary, Only tertiary, by urban planning and there are no government plans to improve it.

You should not expect that the secondary o tertiary networks are connected/continuos or folllows the same logic as in a developed country. In Montevideo almost no investment has been m...
22018-06-22 02:58:14 UTCgeoJenn Thanks for the information, Muralito! You're right, every country has different levels of road development and infrastructure. OSM highway classifications are great for this issue because they are based on how a road is used instead of how much a government develops a road. Do you have more advice f...
32018-06-22 12:02:23 UTCmuralito For Montevideo, you could find the official road hierarchy in
http://intgis.montevideo.gub.uy/sit/tmp/estructuradores.zip

This is not meant to strictly follow them, just take as other input to see how the traffic flows in the city.

The advice would be not to put roads in categories higher th...
12018-06-01 12:59:54 UTCmuralito Tertiary roads are preferential over residential roads that cross them, or over some parallel roads near them, so Avenida Rocha should be tertiary.

The continuity of road network (tertiary in this case) is not always a fact, as you expect to be in developed countries. Urban planning was and is sc...
22018-06-01 17:53:52 UTCgeoJenn Hi! You're right, I agree. Network continuity is different depending on the country and area. I changed Avenida Rocha back to tertiary until it intersects with 25 de Agosto. What do you think?
12018-06-01 13:06:19 UTCmuralito Well done! Some months ago was under contruction and I haven't see new imagery for this new junction.

Should this be adjusted when new imagery is available?
22018-06-01 16:43:36 UTCgeoJenn Thank you! I aligned to Strava, so it should be accurate. :)
12018-01-16 21:02:50 UTCgeoJenn Addresses look good
12017-12-05 02:02:08 UTCgeoJenn Hi, MAPNIK. I can't verify the buildings you created in the Upper Pierce Reservoir in any imagery. What source did you use?
22017-12-05 02:05:17 UTCgeoJenn I am specifically referring to these buildings:
way 168810767
way 168810815
way 168810799
way 168810762
way 168810778
way 168810808
way 168810775
way 168810818
way 168810737
way 168810785

Thank you!
geoJenn has contributed to 6 changeset discussions(s) with a total of 12 comment(s)