ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 153951480 | Ok no problem thanks! |
|
| 154794690 | Est-ce une nouvelle piste cyclable sur le bord de l'ancien golf? Est-ce que les barrières sont démantelées? Merci de valider. |
|
| 154618732 | We could also contact the city and ask for a no-foot crossing sign there. This may be easier than you think! |
|
| 154618732 | Keep in mind that I agree 100% we need to be able do distinguish dangerous crossings and we at Chaire Mobilite are exploring future ways to do so as well. See https://www.reddit.com/r/openstreetmap/comments/12p3nee/dangerous_pedestrian_crossing/ for more info. |
|
| 154618732 | I understand very well. You could change foot=permissive isntead, but there is no way right now to specify the danger level of a footpath. I wish there was, but it does not exist yet. Usually, we should use other data on top of osm for this kind of usage, but I know it is difficult to implement. However, you can add any tag you like and use them for your specific routing. Example: routing:danger=1-10 and then in your routing engine you could route only if danger <= 5 or so. But keep in mind this is non-standard and people could remove those unstandard tags. The problem here is that on a Sunday at 7AM, this crossing is almost always emty and thus very safe, but at rush hour on a weekday, this is dangerous, but still legal. Highway code explains that you must use a crosswalk if between two intersections, but at an intersection, you can cross, even if there is no paint or crosswalk as such, expcet if there is a specific sign for pedestrian saying it is illegal to cross the street there. |
|
| 154618732 | Unsafe but legal. Unfortunately, we need to keep them. Thanks! |
|
| 154415385 | Also, please use this offset when dealing with Montreal Bing 2020 aerial imagery: 0.6,-1.54 See this page: osm.wiki/Montr%C3%A9al under Bing Maps Offset |
|
| 154415385 | That's fine, but can you explain why you remove the connectivity with the taxiways? |
|
| 153949145 | The dental technician would be the person who build the implant. The denturist is the one who will install it in the patient mouth. |
|
| 153949145 | Honestly I don't know, but in french, the name of the places (Denturologiste) is translated to denturist, so this should be correct to use the speciality=denturist. |
|
| 153944471 | Please do not test in public open street map data. You may be flagged for vandalism. Reverting. |
|
| 153949145 | Denturologiste = Denturist
|
|
| 153951480 | Shouldn't we add informal paths there so the park is accessible from Rue des Paquerettes? Pedestrian would not make the detour through Moise-Vincent and Julien-Bouthillier to go to the park. |
|
| 153869035 | I fixed it. Thanks! |
|
| 153869035 | authorised personnel only would mean access=private, not no. foot=no would mean even employees would have no access. |
|
| 153781809 | Please verify that there are no missing crossings when changing to separate instead of both/left/right for sidewalks.
|
|
| 153644286 | Merci pour l'info. C'est bizarre qu'ils n'aient pas au moins connecté la nouvelle piste au viaduc de la rue Saint-Pierre en attendant. Ça doit être cause d'un terrain privé. |
|
| 153644286 | Il semble que la traverse de l'A30 sera construite dans une deuxième phase:
|
|
| 153644286 | Ils vont vraiment abandonner le petit bout qui manque? Où sera la fin de cette piste cyclable finalement? Merci si vous pouvez trouver l'info. |
|
| 153587458 | These are paths used for access and are legit if you want to route to a specific pitch. I will readd them back. |