Good day MihaiBenta,

The tag motorcar=* (like all other access tags) should only be used to indicate legal access restrictions. If a street is too narrow for motorcars please use highway=path instead.

Good day. Is it possible that you had a building filter activated when making the edits in this changeset?

Ways 1085052876 and 1085052873 both were previously connected to a building=roof and were correctly tagged as covered=yes.

Hi Schadow, Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this.

(1) It seems that there's a global consensus that access on barriers is the bare minimum, with access on all affected ways being preferable. There are some cases where only the latter will allow for correct routing (for example private subdivisions with several gates).

(2) Some maps choose to display access restrictions on ways, some choose not to. It can be very useful to visually identify private roads on a map without having to do a routing test.

(3) I think the main criteria for private access is a closed gate not open to the general public. Security guards or no trespassing signs are only optional.

(4) I'm not familiar with any other router that equals access=private to access=no. Usually it is interpreted equal to access=destination. Anyone travelling to a private destination either already has permission to enter (e.g. owner, employee) or receives it upon arrival (e.g. visitor, delivery).

I Cavite alone there are more than 6000 residential ways (~12% of all residential roads) tagged as access=private. It would be very limiting not to include these in routing.

(5) If the guard or homeowner needs to allow/approve access then permissive is not the right tag. Permissive in OSM means that a road is open to the general public but in the future the owner could decide to put up a gate and change it to private.

Good day Schadow,

No sticker no entry policy means that anyone entering this subdivison requires individual permission from the guard. This corresponds to access=private in OSM.

Access=permissive would only be applicable if the gate is open at all times and no verification is needed to enter.

Good day. What is your source for the motor vehicle access restriction? This seems quite unlikely for a tertiary road.

We're in touch, thank you for your concerns.

Maayong adlaw Malvin and welcome to OSM!

Thank you very much for improving OSM with your local knowledge.

Please don't be discouraged by that angry mapper who removed all of your edits. I restored your contributions and made some improvements.

Tagging in OSM is very complex and nobody can expect that you know about all these details from the beginning.

It always helps to check how similar already existing objects are tagged. Or if you're uncertain about something you can always try to find new tags in the wiki (osm.wiki/wiki/) or on taginfo (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/).

You could also join the telegram channel of the local community (https://t.me/OSMph). Lots of people will be happy to help you with any questions you have.

A few hints for future edits:
- addr:housenumber is only for housenumbers, for barangays you can simply use addr:barangay
- addr:street is only for street names, if the first part of the address is a sitio/purok/subdivision instead you can use addr:place
- you don't need to add description=functional to all objects, but on the other hand if you want to specify that something is currently not functional I would recommend to have a look at the lifecycle prefix wikipage.

Keep up the great work!

In this changeset a place of worship complete with name, religion, denomination and address was added.

How does a mistaken addr namespace and an unconventional description invalidate this contribution?

It obviously isn't. A much more suitable tag would be addr:barangay.

You as an experienced mapper could have probably found this out in less than a minute of research on google and taginfo.

Pointing out incorrect tagging without providing a better alternative isn't really helpful.

Good day Spaghetti Monster. Your efforts to maintain data consistency are very much appreciated.

This mappers has joined us less than a week ago and clearly he is very eager in contributing his local knowledge by mapping place names, hospitals, government offices, sport venues, churches and many other things. These are all very valuable contributions.

Obviously some of the added geometries, the changeset comments as well as some of the tagging choices leave much room for improvements. But none of this justifies completely reverting almost a hundred changesets within 30 minutes of first contacting the mapper.

Please give local communities a chance to reach out to new mappers to help them learn about all the complexities and intricacies of OSM.

I reverted your reverts and fixed the tagging and geometry issues instead. Maybe you could consider similar actions instead of radical deletions.

I agree that English should not have any default precedence. It is my impression that there is almost always a name that is more predominantly used than the other, but I like the idea to use the language with the most native speakers in a given area for the primary name tag if an object truly has equally common names in several official languages.

Good afternoon Erwin,

The locally spoken languages in Tagakpan are Bisaya and Klata. Anyone conversing in either of them uses the term Barangay Hall. This is also the name that is written on the facade of the building.

Adding additional non-local translations seems fine, but please don't replace the primary name tag.

Currently all HUCs and ICCs with mapped boundaries are tagged as admin_level=6.

But giving this some further considerations I actually think there are many good reasons why it would make sense to tag them as admin_level=4.

R.A. 7160 Section 25 effectively defines HUCs and ICCs as first level subdivisons on equal level with provinces.

Thanks for pointing this out! The commonly stated phrase that only motorways have implied access restrictions really doesn't seem to hold up.

Hey Jherome. Thanks for this massive clean-up.

Just wondering, isn't foot=yes and bicycle=yes the default for anything other than motorways? Adding this tags seems highly redundant, especially for highway segments that already have sidewalk or cycleway tags.

Hi Abysmallow, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thank you for your contributions!

The tag place=town is only used for municipalities, for barangays you can use place=village.

If you'd like to learn more about the basics of tagging you could have a look at this overview of guidelines by the local community:

osm.wiki/Philippines/Mapping_conventions

Happy mapping =)

Hi Marliza, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thank you for your contributions!

When mapping barangays you can just create a node (like this one: node/9215197632) near the center of the barangay.

If you'd like to learn more about the basics of tagging you could have a look at this overview of guidelines by the local community:

osm.wiki/Philippines/Mapping_conventions

Good day vulasala, thanks for catching this!

I'm a bit confused by your suggestion. This is not a singular feature that could be represented by a node.

Piedra Tuff just means tuff stone which describes the unexposed bedrock that makes up this entire peninsula. I'm not aware of any tags to store such information and I also don't think it's within the scope of OSM to map what's below the visible landuse=* or natural=*.

Not just maybe. This was clearly a description of the underlying bedrock which is tuffaceous indeed (limestone to be more precise).