That's clearly a driveway for the police station, and not a frontage road. Notice how it is right outside of the reporting room.

tbh there is no gyratory; just use the turn lanes etc and then vehicles could get where they need to go, no need to drive into Boundary Street.

The physical shape is basically asking for smooth merging from Lam Tei Interchange (ground) to CPR, while giving priority to Route 9 exit. Just that, it's not feasible to draw a yield line along the travel direction (way too long), so they just went with a yield line right at where the lane separation ends.

It did momentarily occur to me "I should do undelete", but then I thought, "the original straight-only is consequential because the real one should be no-uturn", so I just made a new one.

Also iD clicking is easier than JOSM clicking.

Note:

I tried to update the bus relations where reasonable, but it turns out some bus relations are just plain broken and should probably be reviewed by some public transport mappers.

Again, I always expect Mapillary to have no data at all, at least for Hong Kong.

To clarify, I know "straight" junctions should keep straight. What you may notice about "keep straight" may be because the slip path is short so that the "keep angle" rule forces the short path to be straight all the way (I personally find them ugly).

However what seems unspecified is this kind of "far side slip" junctions.

Ah, good find. Usually turning right does imply "u-turn is allowed".

Will make a todo note for now. The plan is to somehow add e.g. source = mapillary to the turn restriction itself so in the future people will know something is up when they see a source tag.

I have heard about something like this before, but to me it feels more like some sort of artistic discussion. This would be different from e.g. earlier discussed "dashed lines separation".

And, specifically, for this case, I did not know / did not notice where the control box is at.

... ????????

iirc I have never declared my stance on the mapping style of "free ref node"; this is observed to be seemingly a convention.

@kingkingHK You quoted a changeset. To clarify, my comment on that changeset is essentially "that free ref node shouldn't exist because there's no traffic signals at the roundabout". There is no judgement on whether it's good or bad.

At minimum only you @kingkingHK found the "free ref" mapping style to be of poor-quality. I find merits of that style, because now I can very easily know where a specific ref traffic signal is located.

@Kovoschiz mentioned putting the ref at the control box. This is definitely correct as expected from the style of OSM Global, but sometimes we just don't know where that box is, or maybe there are multiple boxes for the same set of signals.

It seems to me, by convention, there should have a single free node that contains the traffic signals ref info, and then several based nodes that actually describes where/how the traffic signals apply.

1. aerial imagery by ESRI and MapBox seem to show a triangle, which indicates a yield sign
2. I was about to say, need not worry too much since soon we will need to map Yuen Long South developments and there will likely be junction upgrades, but I see you have already remade the changeset

info: there is a South Asian (Pakistani?) community here. what probably happens is that during some hours, some of the folks would lay out some shops (usually at Pei Ho Street due to low traffic) and sell homemade stuff and chat among themselves. doesn't feel like a real tourist attraction.

Indeed, this split was not originally made by me. Seeing it is this close to the island, I opt for beautification. This is more on subjective preferences.

Then again, if it were me, there wouldn't be a split at all in the first place; just mark the crossing with "it has a traffic island" and finish. Simple stuff.

osm.wiki/Hong_Kong/Transport/Public_transport

> 至於泊街的巴士總站（有調度功能），[...]
> For a roadside terminus (with operation arrangement ability) [...]

does that count?

also, you never know, some pages at HKBusFandom doesn't have much OSM integration, while some other pages have very strong integration. I believe their side works similar to this side.

note/5151410

Resolved via changeset/177966709

I think I want house=terraced ; see the extra d

idk, my criteria for semi-detached is "only one side connects to separating walls". If we have both sides touching the separating walls, then we cannot distinguish them from regular rowhouses other than "aerial imagery says this rowhouse chain only contains 2 houses".