Hi! I wrote a python script to convert a GTFS stops file into a OSM xml file with the appropriate OSM tags. Then I have been reviewing it one street at a time and merging each point with the existing OSM bus stop, as well as adding a name manually. I can share the python script if you are interested.

Best,
Alex

You may want to suggest changes to osm.wiki/Land_use on the forum, because this mapping style even seems to be suggested by the wiki, at least as a first pass which can be improved upon in the future if someone has the the time/motivation.

I could go either way with it. It seems to be separated in more places than others (for example with the bus islands which I wanted to map at some point). On the other hand using cycleway=track allows for a router to easily switch between the cycleway and the road. If you want to change it to cycleway:right=track, don't forget to add cycleway:right:oneway=no

Ah, I see what happened here. There was a node with public_transport=platform as well as an area with public_transport=platform which represented the same feature in real life (a tram platform) but had the contradicting values for bin and wheelchair. When I combined them it resulted in the yes;no situation there is now.

Therefore I don't know which value is correct, as it was mapped inconsistently in the first place. I will survey the situation the next time I am in the area.

Thanks,
Alex

At least according to osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway, you can use either highway=path or highway=cycleway (along with the other tags you mentioned) for this sort of situation without any sort of difference, so IMO it doesn't make much of a difference either way. I do however think that it should be one way considering you can go from the sidewalk to the bike lane portion without any large effort.

They are relatively new, given they were just opened in 2023. They're asphalt next to the sidewalk, and I rode it myself. The construction contractor also published some drone footage during construction if you'd like to see what it looks like: https://graef-usa.com/west-north-avenue/

I think it was a mistake or something; anyways I changed it back to residential

Hi!
It looks like you are mapping traffic islands with highway=pedestrian, which is meant for pedestrian streets and areas. I believe a more fitting tag would be area:highway=traffic_island, given pedestrians aren't meant to walk along them.

Hi, I meant that the offer a bus shuttle to local sports games. It's a service offered by many bars, at least in Milwaukee. I don't believe there is an existing tagging scheme for this service.

Note that highway=footway can have any surface, and that surface can be specified with the surface=* key. Thanks for contributing to OSM!

(Replying from my main account instead of my import account)
I didn't set this value, it looks like the value was initially set by shuui.

While I can agree that being lined by businesses and controlled by traffic lights can often be an indicator of highway=secondary in Chicago, the loop is special in that it is so busy that nearly every street will be controlled by traffic lights. In addition, having every street be secondary is not very helpful to someone trying to identify the main through routes.

I'm not sure highway=pedestrian is appropriate on bike path outlines such as osm.org/way/1124504884 given that pedestrians are prohibited on the bike path. (See https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=367516585509083)

I believe a couple of the roads you tagged as highway=busway are not actually busways. For example, Commercial Street is signed as a pedestrian zone, and this case is covered in osm.wiki/Tag:highway=busway#Similar_infrastructure under "Transit Mall"

The approved proposal for highway busway differentiates busways from bus only service roads. The latter is used for the access ways to a bus station. See osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbusway#Similar_infrastructure.

Now that I look into it a bit more, there appears to be two historic districts, and I mapped the one from the NRHP, and you mapped the one from the Milwaukee government. The Local one is more "real" in that it actually defines preservation guidelines, while the NRHP doesn't define very much, and is (as far as I can tell) "little more than recognition by the government that the resource is worthy of preservation." The Wikipedia article was helpful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_districts_in_the_United_States

Hello,

Busways (as they were voted on in the busway proposal) specifically excluded ways for accessing a bus station from the definition of highway=busway. See osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbusway#Similar_infrastructure for more detail. (Do note however that the entire extent of the busway proposal has not been translated into the French version of the wiki article)

Best,
Alex

Do you know what relationship this has to the already existing East Side Commercial Historic District? See osm.org/way/1157701337 (The boundary of that I drew based on the NRHP document). They might be different things (i.e a NRHP historic district vs something like a business improvement district)

For better or worse, the community voted that the separate value (highway=busway) should be used for BRT corridors as they are distinct from service roads (and BRT corridors don't meet the definition of highway=service). See the proposal for details of why this distinction was made: osm.wiki/Proposal:Tag:highway%3Dbusway

Bus station access roads were specifically excluded from this (when they are not part of a BRT corridor) as they can meet the definition of a service road (access to a property).

Oops, fix it now, thanks for catching that!