Ciao, benvenuto nella community di openstreetmap, ti consiglio di entrare nel gruppo telegram https://t.me/OpenStreetMapItalia (italia) https://t.me/osm_veneto/1 (Veneto)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177510159

errato rimosso attraversamento

Perché hai cancellato way/1382088228 ???

io ho usato il preset automatico di iD per "accesso per i veicoli di soccorso/emergenza"

c'è anche la wiki: service=emergency_access

"way/1272431845: I added bicycle=permissive as it is wide enough for bicyles, and is a safer option for cyclists. It's also in continuation from a signed segregetated foot-cycle-way to the West"

I understand your choice, but I don’t agree. Together with the local FIAB, we decided not to add bicycle=permissive on wide sidewalks because it creates confusion both for people cycling and when visualizing the cycle infrastructure of our city, making it harder to understand where bike facilities are missing.

way/1382016928: by convention, the markings seem to be usually mapped only on the crossing node, but not on the crossing way.

This doesn’t make sense to me at all: by tagging the data only on the node, you don’t make the information available to those who actually use the crossing, but only to those who, while traveling along the main road, encounter the crossing.

1459105433 like 176017403 (I suppose you mean way/1459105433):
This looks like a footpath, so it as a fottpath. If your prefer path, no problem. Important that the information like surface, smothness, width is present. In this specific cse the verrtical signin is most likely wrong: coming from the South, there is a sign that motor vehicles to destination. I presume this applies only to the southern, paved part of the way. The northern part is only compaced, and certanly not intened for for motorbikes.

The first section of the road from the south is only for those who need to get there, up to the bollard. (By law, the sign prohibits motor vehicles, meaning three-wheeled motorcycles or quadricycles.) At the end of the path, there is no signage. Therefore, making it pedestrian-only is incorrect.

These sections are shared cycle-pedestrian paths, according to the horizontal and vertical signage recently installed by the municipality. As a iD mapper, I would tag them as:
highway=cycleway
foot=designated
segregated=yes

Just as I had mapped them before and in accordance with osm.wiki/IT:Tag:highway=cycleway

1272431847 and 1272431846 are not path but foot-cycleway, why you edited like path? it was mapped as foot-cycleway with iD standard
osm.wiki/IT:Tag:highway=cycleway

highway=cycleway
foot=designated
segregated=no

1459105433 like 176017403 is a path, no sign saying its only footway

1382016928 why no markings?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176017403

too big edit area
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176022830

1272431845 its only for pedestrian

why 176017403 not more a path??

brifge?

hi, its a test for a proposal page

way/1260770435/history

era stato aggiunto un ponte non esistente

it is the company that is building the building. This yard is named "cantiere GSE"

https://www.elmapgroupinnovation.com/news/gse-cittadella-pd/

https://gsegroup.it/

if you pass through there you will see signs calling the construction site that

missing addr:street addr:postcode

Questa modifica anziché rimuovere un errore precedente (l'allungamento della strada pubblica dentro l'azienda in corrispondenza delle strade interne aziendali) ha spostato l'allungamento in corrispondenza di un'altra strada interna. Il comune ha dovuto mettere la segnaletica "NO GPS NO TRUCKS" dato che qualche camion deve aver usato la strada cercando di entrare in azienda.
Ora ho sistemato io ma ti chiedo di fare più attenzione

Ciao, e grazie mille per il tuo contributo! 🌟 Un piccolo suggerimento per i prossimi cambiamenti: mantenere i changeset piccoli e localizzati può rendere il lavoro più semplice per tutti. Aiuta a evitare conflitti, facilita la revisione da parte degli altri mappatori e mantiene la mappa ancora più accurata.

Alcuni suggerimenti amichevoli: • Concentrati su un’area geografica ristretta (come una singola città, un quartiere o una provincia) • Evita di mescolare località lontane nello stesso changeset • Salva/carica prima di iniziare a lavorare in un’area completamente diversa

Se sei curioso, la wiki spiega di più qui:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Grazie ancora per la tua energia nel mappare e… buona mappatura! 🗺️

Hi there, and thanks a lot for your contribution! 🌟 Just a little tip for future edits: keeping changesets small and local can make things smoother for everyone. It helps prevent conflicts, makes it easier for fellow mappers to review, and keeps the map even more accurate.

A few friendly suggestions:
• Focus edits within a small geographical area (like a single city, district, or province)
• Try not to mix far-apart locations in one changeset
• Save/upload before starting work in a totally different area

If you’re curious, the wiki explains more here: osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks again for your mapping energy, and happy mapping! 🗺️

Hi there, and thanks a lot for your contribution! 🌟 Just a little tip for future edits: keeping changesets small and local can make things smoother for everyone. It helps prevent conflicts, makes it easier for fellow mappers to review, and keeps the map even more accurate.

A few friendly suggestions:
• Focus edits within a small geographical area (like a single city, district, or province)
• Try not to mix far-apart locations in one changeset
• Save/upload before starting work in a totally different area

If you’re curious, the wiki explains more here: osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks again for your mapping energy, and happy mapping! 🗺️