Peter,

Thanks for your patience in my reply! I think you are right that this historic=boundary_stone is the better option here. I can change all of them.

Thanks Jess, I’m open to discussion on this. I hope I didn’t sound obtuse here. They do function as little Parks, but they don’t really have names. So I’m not really sure what the best tag would be. Is that a park or maybe recreation ground? When parks don’t have names I often use recreation ground but I’ve never been 100% sure if that is the right approach, also, there are more of these green areas along the roadway with a little path where I could probably go either way on grass or one of these recreational tags.

Ref: DWG ticket Ticket#2022121410000203 data@openstreetmap.org if you prefer email

Hi there, what is the source of the natural features mapped in this changeset? Is it simply traced from imagery? There is a fair amount of overlapping wetlands that don't seem to make sense. For instance, you have this wetland:
osm.org/relation/13909443

and this one overlapping

osm.org/relation/14460268

There are also upland islands, like this one below, that should not be part of the wetland, rather an inner ring.

osm.org/way/632949570

Thanks,

Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group

Boopington. This is unacceptable. You must comment with something useful. You are now blocked again.

Hi Jess, what makes these parks "not parks"? They operate as community parks/greenspace in areas that were purchased for a highway that was never built.

Hi there, Elliott here speaking on behalf of the Data Working Group. In this changeset you'd deleted the UM BioPark polygon. Was that an error? I have restored it.

Eric, nice work on this! I am a fellow ECG editor and last worked on editing the greenway about a year ago. Thanks for the recent edits. Would you be interested in helping me track the progress via the wiki? https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/east-coast-greenway-relation-continuity-edits/6483

Also, are you affiliated with the ECG at all? In the past, for updates, I've used their official data (in collaboration with the staff) to make updates. Tell me about your process. Thanks!

123456!

oh, I see now about the detour so this make more sense! thanks for tagging it. I just asked the 9/11 Trail folks if they'd like the trail rerouted to follow the detour during the closure.

Hi Michal! What sort of barrier is the one at the entrance to the tunnel? A bollard perhaps?

Just a note to be wary of maintaining route connectivity when adding crossings. I know you know this already. In a few instances I see crosswalks were added and, in the process, broke the East Coast Greenway relation.

Ex: osm.org/way/1087560668#map=19/39.28059/-76.61138
osm.org/way/1087560666#map=19/39.28057/-76.61134
osm.org/way/1087560667#map=19/39.28078/-76.61146

Since you're editing in JOSM, try the "Colorize bicycle routes" map paint style. Thanks!

(I've got a changeset open now so no need to fix, I got them.)

wow, nice work on this one!

FYI, I've blocked Zluuzki for this action. Please read osm.org/user_blocks/6573

nice work on this Greg!

Hey, FYI I fixed this for ya by adding the full extent of the EEZ. You can now see the arc is properly drawn. It will take some time to refresh. osm.org/way/640962318

Thanks for reverting. I think the pipeline data is actually useful data for the project and I would support adding them. These blocks however are meaningless as localities. This part could have been dropped from the import.

@pitscheplatsch looks like your link is wrong by a digit. Here is the original changeset. osm.org/changeset/129300298

Hello again, some trouble with this edit, similar to the comment over on osm.org/changeset/127644478

Have a look at osm.org/way/535792738 for instance. This should not be restricted. It would appear you'd selected all of the roads around the BW Parkway with a lasso tool and JOSM and forgot to remove these. That is a simple mistake but this would drastically alter bicycle routing along Laurel Bowie Road.

Thank you,

Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group

Hi there, which "MD bicycle route network map" specifically was this edit in reference to? MDOT SHA has been adjusting their restrictions lately and there is some out of date information online. Also, it would appear that a few of the routes marked as prohibited are either, not prohibited, or not necessary. Motorways are bicycle=no by default so it may not be necessary to add these tags to them.

Did you happen to check any of these on the ground? On OSM we have a policy of not copying from other maps, and in this edit you're claiming to have copied from another map. I see more bike/ped access changes by you around Maryland that may also be out of date.

Please let us know how you came across the information used to update these roads.

Thank you,

Elliott Plack
Data Working Group