I think I got the change got backed out; it was the "tag fix" from iD.

I don't remember the details of this changeset from 15 years ago and I don't know how to get a view of what changed before/after. I'm going to guess I moved some of the nodes from the original import.

Weird; not sure how that happened. I put the original website back.

Thanks for the note. You're correct, I've been simply using the "does it have a dividing line" criteria for tertiary roads.

Interestingly, I had a separate discussion with someone else about this, given that cities sometimes throw a dividing line on a road just because it is wide. Not sure where that went; I don't know how to track changeset discussions via the web site.

While I'm not totally happy about moving the criteria from objective to subjective, I agree it makes more sense to provide a way of describing a road's connectivity than looking for lanes.

Anyway, I'll try to use more lane_markings=yes. I'm not sure about adding the corresponding lanes=2; better data but it kind of kills the joy.

I'm going to guess that Manhattan Beach was not an attempt to bring a little bit of New York to the west coast though. ;)

One more thought about tertiary roads: I always leave service roads as-is, striped or not. Shopping malls often have roads like that.

I'll take a look at your opinions on road types. Looks like you've given it quite a bit of thought.

Agreed, every bit of road with a center line isn't tertiary, given that it might just last a few feet around a bend and is there for safety. There is some human discretion involved. Does it look right when viewed at 1km resolution? I'm not sure the wiki really captures the idea of a "through street", since it can simply be the suggested way to get around a neighborhood with one entrance (e.g. can a loop be a tertiary road by definition?).

Yes, a road like Rialto doesn't really look like much of a "major" street, but I didn't put the center stripe on it. ;) I wonder if the powers that be record why they chose to do what they did for every individual road? Anyway, I'm not going to lose any sleep if it is re-tagged as residential.

I had no idea that Venice was actually modeled on Venice Italy with man-made canals. Wild.

Great question. I think tertiary roads in the US are the most basic roads with a center line and only one lane in each direction. The wiki talks about "and main connector roads through neighborhoods" in the US.

Looking at the classification from the bottom, we have residential, unclassified, tertiary and secondary. Unclassified is kind of weird; it feels like a thing for the UK but not so much for the rest of the world, kind of like asking who is the prime minister of the US.

Agreed, it's not helpful to declare 40 million year old features to be volcanoes, for example Elk Rock Island, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_Rock_Island, was a volcano.

However, there are some features that look like volcanoes but aren't, like Spencer Butte in Eugene, while other features, look like volcanoes and are like Kelly Butte in Portland. In this case, the tag feels appropriate to me.

Taken literally the lack of a crater indicates, in Oregon, that Mt. Jefferson and Black Butte aren't volcanoes while Mt. Tabor became a volcano when they excavated the basketball court and exposed a crater.

I'm curious about the criteria are you using for natural=volcano. Wikipedia says Hogan Butte is an extinct volcano per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boring_Lava_Field.

I think that's fixed now? I was trying to expand the "West" abbreviation.

Also, I'm not familiar with the name:prefix tag; it looks like "W" is actually part of the street name and should be expanded out to West. Otherwise, it seems like the W/West needs to be removed from the name entirely.

Whoops, drag and drop error. Fixed.