I've asked Nathperot to respond via osm.org/user_blocks/7206

J’ai demandé à l’utilisateur de répondre à ces commentaires en ajoutant un bloc zéro heure.

Thanks for doing that path!

here here!

In light of today's events, could you take a look at this interchange? According to PennDOT, some of these ramps are not only closed but removed altogether. Need some fresh eyes to review the closures. Thanks!

Heh, I think the data in SC may have been stale by the time you’d added this. I updated it to opposite_lane for that contraflow lane heading north. See ya around sotmus

hi there. good looking mapping here. What is a bench=perch?

Hi there, thanks for adding this. There is some new Mapillary here from 5/27 if you'd like to look and make some revisions to the fixmes. Ciao!

Hi there, that's great! I know MORE and appreciate their work. And, I especially appreciate your work in the arena of mapping paths. Please keep it up. It is a passion of mine as well. I've done a project with the staff and Friends of Patapsco Valley State Park to map all authoritative trails there in precise detail and have done similar project at the various reservoir watersheds. I hike and trail run, but not really MTB--something I'd love to try.

If you don't know the surface, totally fine to leave blank. I will often put in the type of 'unpaved' as a placeholder when I know its not a paved path, but not much else. On the topic of surface, OSM has weird surface types that don't always line up to American English. Some trail ones to watch for:

- gravel: only used on trails and tracks that have golf ball-sized gravel. Examples would be BGE access roads where they dump gravel in as the bed.
- compacted: what we mainly think of as "gravel". The NCR trail is compacted. Its a mix of fine gravel and dirt smashed into a rollable surface.
- fine_gravel: pea sized gravel that is loose and hard to ride on any bike. Not common.

If you find new trails, I'd love to know about them! I do a fair bit of exploratory OSM hiking/running, so if you'd like to, we could exchange contact infos or send them via OSM messaging.

Don't worry about the boundaries too, I fixed the ones I noticed.

Also, one other tip: the OSM standards for tagging route color are tricky. The way to do this is by setting up a route relation and then putting that information on the route. There's instructions on the wiki but it is an advanced process that may require other software. If you find some of them, let me know and I'll help you. You can also see all the trails with routes using this waymarked trails tool https://mtb.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=13.0/39.2426/-76.7486

The example above is PVSP.

Happy trails, please feel free to ask any questions.

Elliott

osm.org/changeset/135759049

Example changeset comment. I corrected the boundary here so you don't need to worry about that. Just keep it in mind in the future.

Hello there and welcome to OpenStreetMap. Thank you for adding the new Solstice Valley Trail at the Waterworks Park!

A few tips to get you started on your mapping quests:

1. Type a little bit more about your edits when you write changeset comments. "adding path" doesn't say much. Instead try to tell what you mapped, why, and how. Here's a guide: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments#How_should_I_write_Changeset_Comments No two comments should really be the same.

2. Avoid crossing the boundaries of a boundary when crossing them. For instance, in this edit you'd snapped the new path to the park boundary. That path can cross it without touching.

3. Please add trail surfaces! If you were there, you could survey the surface type, e.g., dirt or ground. That is helpful for path mapping.

Otherwise, keep up the good work.

--
Elliott Plack
for the OpenStreetMap Foundation Data Working Group
and Maryland-based mapper

all set: osm.org/changeset/135540344

FYI osm.org/way/763624993 not a residential road. It is a gated driveway.

Nice work! Here's another one potentially. osm.org/changeset/135450211

What was incorrect about the forests? Typically we would not delete them, but rather fix them.

excellent work with the landuse mapping!

Oh, I didn't see that. How do you think it is best to handle? The one has a brand wikidata.

I did not detect any hostility here. I think we're all able to reach a rational conclusion. The western side meets motorway standards which is the only highway classification that is strictly based on roadway characteristics (full access control). The east side is a surface street with 6 lanes, in the right of way of a former interstate, hence the appearance of it being like a freeway. But I can assure you that on the ground, the city wants it to be a walkable normal road connecting the arena and park areas. Baloo, have you had a chance to check out the project I linked to above? It is worth reviewing... well thought out!

Thanks for understanding. Yes, if I understand correctly, you are free to map those abandoned railroads right on buildings or roadways although some mappers don't like it if you put a highway and railway tag on the same way.

I feel your pain on this issue and truly appreciate your dedication (with the hashtag #CloseTheNotes.) There are times when I've deleted abandoned railroads that are totally and completely gone in all senses (the lines were just there for someone to remember where they were went.) In that case, I think there is a case for deleting them, and Russ is free to disagree with me here (good forum topic) but if someone like him actually surveyed the old trackbed and found evidence somehow in a building footprint or whatever, then I'd leave that one. You can always comment on the original changeset and see if the user would be amenable to a compromise. No one is right 100% of the time.

Kindly,
Elliott

See osm.org/user_blocks/7054