Is there a waiting shed (shelter) or a "Loading and Unloading Zone" sign in front of Sutherland? I checked Mapillary, but what I only found is a shed in front of Puregold. I think the Carmona LGU will unlikely mark a PUV loading/unloading area too close to one already designated.

I've tried to fix the P2P routes you've mentioned here but I didn't saw immediately this edit. I've renamed all the UBE Express routes on my edit, and fixed the airport shuttle service (is rather run by MIAA, as what I saw last July, and must be mapped to both serve arrivals and departures).

I agree I could move the other P2P routes I've mapped to use the arrivals bus terminal instead, given T3 has an open indoor landside unlike the other NAIA terminals.

It's not provided in the source, but I can assume the route stops at the departures of all NAIA terminals. I can remember seeing a P2P at NAIA T3, but I don't know fully if incoming services use the upper level for unloading and departing buses the lower level for loading (as with all other terminals, given they don't have a freely accessible indoor landside).

Fine to me, since the new jeepneys are somewhat close to a minibus. So, some possible PUV route tagging conventions (not yet final) are:

- Bus: route=bus. ref tag with prefix dependent on service type, P(provincial)/C(city)/P2P(P2P/express bus)-[abbreviation of route name], otherwise use posted ones or simple form of route name if route name is not in the usual format). Can add departure time (in 24-hour/military clock format) for once-daily services.
- Modern PUJ: route=bus, share_taxi=yes, ref tag with L prefix (LE if express, such as those using the expressways), otherwise use posted reference or simple form of name (if route name is not in the usual format, such as on loop routes).
- Traditional PUJ: route=share_taxi, ref tag with J prefix (JE if express, such as those using the expressways), otherwise use posted reference or simple form of name (if route name is not in the usual format, such as on loop routes).
- UV Express: route=share_taxi, ref tag with UV prefix.
- Multicab/Filcab services: no standardized scheme yet (I'm seeing some of such routes tagged as express routes, with E prefix on ref tag, ex. CATRASCO PITX-GenTri via Centennial Road, and Baclaran/PITX-MOA).
- Route names normally follow those painted on the sides of the vehicle, and is formatted as "Point A-Point B" (can add "via points C" if marked). Operator name (can be abbreviated) and/or vehicle/service type (optional or necessary, especially to avoid confusion) is placed before the route name, separated by colon. If operator name (company, co-op or driver's association) is not known or route is run by too many operators, just use the service type for name prefix. If there is a signed reference, use service type/network name and reference (ex. Jeepney 09-M, Green Frog Route 001) as name prefix.

Stay home, stay safe, and happy mapping. Ingat!

I do hear about the opening of SRITT at around August/September 2019, but based on what I heard about the terminal's dry run, I can say it's nearly non-operational due to the bus companies' reluctance to move their terminals from along EDSA. I haven't been to SM Santa Rosa on my last trip from June to July, but if you've been there pre-ECQ, have you seen any buses there? That can help if I'll consider moving the Santa Rosa-Market Market/BGC route to Balibago provided the present situation before and after ECQ.

I see, but I still prefer tagging "traditional" jeepney routes with route=bus plus the optional share taxi tag.

I think we can keep the route=bus tag for modern PUJ routes, and prefix the "traditional" services with J (and express routes with JE).

Considering the unknown status of the route=share_taxi tag, and lack of renderer support for it, I think the route=bus+share_taxi=yes tagging for PUJs should remain, and that's also what we're using for modern PUJ routes.

Could you better be more specific with the sources for your next edits if possible? For this edit, one good source is the JICA 2012 study for the CALAEx Laguna section (though the actual interchange to be built can vary due to space constraints and construction costs).

I hope you stick upon that promise again!

No need to say that, but why would you move Route 55 into Ninoy Aquino Boulevard?

Again, where do you get that 30 kph speed limit for Maharlika Highway through Pili? If there are signs, fine, otherwise, assume 40 (per RA 4136).

I'm noticing you have been mapping names of people in the last days. It is okay to map outlines of houses, but not the name of the owner. For OpenStreetMap's policy on this matter, please read osm.wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information .

The Philippines OpenStreetMap community has been monitoring this matter, see https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/58.

If you have questions or comments, please let me know here or by private message (go to my user profile and click "send message")

I don't know where did you get that Romulo Highway (Route 55, or PH-55 in the way you say it) is moved to Ninoy Aquino Avenue in this edit. The DPWH still assigns that route to Romulo Boulevard, so I reverted it.

Sorry for this (have lost track of my editing activity), but I forgot to save the edits for Talugtug before doing those for Taal.

I would agree only with 30-60 kph if there are signs or so, otherwise, the RA 4136 defaults apply. Some highway segments through towns are signed 30 kph as I remember on a 2015 trip to Ilocos, but if you cannot prove them, I'll be retagging them to reflect the legal default than the "safe", "comfortable", or "practical" speed as you think. Provide me also your observations on your trip if I must keep the 30/60 kph values or retag to follow the national defaults.

So far as national speed limits are concerned, RA 4136 hasn't been amended (though I can remember in the news last 2019 there have been attempts to change the provisions on default speed).

See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/50 for details.

I think it's time you better refer to roads by their name that by numbers. I understand "PH-x" is just the same as "Route x" (which I favor), but if there's a locally known road name, use that. I'm all getting tired of you referring national roads with route numbers by their reference than their name (unless not known).

This edit has been reverted at changeset/82704694. Reason: vandalism incident being monitored at https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/60

This edit has been reverted at changeset/82704694. Reason: vandalism incident being monitored at https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/60