It is really hard to say what kind of mapping for the service road in the gas station is better, especially the station is at the corner as a triangle area.

But when you make them too detailed, it will create an issue for the routers because they cannot tell whether you are on this road or that road (they are both in the gas station) because they are really close to each other.

And thinking about how drivers receive TTS. When they get into the gas station, do they really desire unwanted turn voices?

I've updated them based on my test drives.

Yes.

Feel free to CC me in any relevant discussions.

"traffic_signals=signal" is a vague term as it does not clearly define what kind of "signal" it is.

osm.wiki/Key:traffic_signals

This is really weird.

I've tagged like this for hundreds of times as it is shown in the iD "Type" dropdown.

I've extracted all merchants based on iD warnings. If you feel like it is an error, please revert.

osm.org/changeset/111203875#map=19/39.33555/-76.63047

Seriously speaking, you should check your own data before importing them.

I really wish to delete all your previous imports and then draw the water on my own, because there are too many dated data were added with offset issues.

Please check osm.org/node/158395844#map=19/39.69508/-79.15114

When there is no physical barrier, it should not be mapped as a separate way.

osm.org/way/576465500#map=19/39.45617/-76.29883

May I ask for the reason drawing the road area here?

osm.org/way/979743815#map=19/40.02540/-76.53229

I've removed this stop sign because there is no such thing. You only need to stop when pedestrians are present, but that's common sense.

osm.org/node/7403911083

I don't think the Meadow Park has such a detailed boundary along Big Elk Crk and I've removed them.

Please ensure to enable relevant layer while mapping. You added a duplicate of osm.org/way/61339194 as osm.org/way/904857590.

Moreover, avoid using dated sources to map Maryland.

Would you please check osm.org/way/948324225/? Is it an invalid data?

Please do not reinvent an existing landuse feature for logistic grounds.

osm.wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dcommercial

I don't have any issue with anyone. What I originally wrote was pretty simple: How about...?

It is your choice to "yes/no/whatever". I cannot do anything for you. Checking the source is very important because it not only reduces errors but also saves time of everyone else.

Let's stop this conversation here.

You cannot win this time.

How about verifying the building I mentioned there and see who is correct? It is still "in" the ESRI clarity, why not adding back if I'm wrong?

3 years ago you added something from 10 years ago, that does not sound OK to justify your local knowledge, right?

Yes they are really cosmetic.

What I’ve done is adding the full name of the garage and drop TIGER tags of 2 streets after aligning them.

Please avoid attaching any park area with road segments.

How about learning road type first?

You created a mess here, literally make the data unusable.

osm.org/way/824297022#map=19/39.92517/-77.61639