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

Hi, I see you've made this a trunk, but it doesn't meet the trunk criteria as laid out in the osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance wiki guidance.

I surveyed (walking and biking) along most of the route and it operates like a primary street. it has lights and crosswalks. The trunk classification is for connecting cities of regional importance or between city centers lacking motorways. This road does neither of those things.

As a member of the Data Working Group, I'd ask that you refrain from trunk classification mapping this way, as a large majority of American mappers have settled on one particular use of trunks and as a result, data consumers are treating trunk routes differently.

If you have comments on the guidance, please direct them to the wiki or the forum.

Best,
Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group

Hi Baloo, any idea about the purpose of this ghost ramp? No issues with this edit, I'm just curious. I was thinking it could have been a peel off exit from 35/40 but then they just use the cloverleaf.

Hi there, Elliott from the OSM Data Working Group here. The imagery used in this changeset has a license that would appear to be incompatible with OSM. It prohibits commercial reuse, something that we allow. Do you have explicit permission from the agency to use their imagery? It may be fine if you ask, but until such time I’d ask that you refrain from using this imagery source.

A good method of getting the community to take a look at new imagery sources is to submit it to the https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index project, which is the source for imagery in the ID and JOSM editors.

Thank you,
Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group
Ticket#2023040710000089

Hi CurlingMan, Elliott from the Data Working Group here. I’d ask that you stop doing this deletion of these abandoned railroads. Users that are interested in them are complaining about your removal. That data may not be useful to you but it is useful to someone.

The data working group asks that you refrain from deleting abandoned railroads (such as in this change set or others).

Thank you,

Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group
Ticket#2023040710000267
Contact me at data@openstreetmap.org with any questions and reference the ticket number above.

Work also included: trails and tracks at Copper Mine. Drains and culverts. All base on a hike: https://www.strava.com/activities/8842906698

Hey there! Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap on behalf of the OSM Foundation, Data Working Group.

In this particular edit you changed some unclassified roads to service roads. That is not the commonly accepted practice so I would encourage you to reach out to community about changing roadway classifications. In this case, Chesapeake Overlook Parkway and Turnpike Drive both have addresses assigned to them. Generally, we don't use service tagging on named streets that are the lowest level destination street. Instead, for non-residential roads, we use the minor/unclassified option. Service tagging is reserved for roads around a business on their internal network, such as within a parking lot, and for alleys and driveways. I'll go ahead and update these one's for you.

It is important to apply road tagging consistently as many data users consume OSM data and expect certain standards.

Thanks,

Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group

Hi there,

Why is the fairway grass overlapping the green here? That is not how fairways work. What you're doing falls into the category of a common mapping pitfall for golf courses. Please review osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls and adjust these fairways accordingly.

Thanks!

-- Elliott, OSMF Data Working Group

Thank you. I should mention that it is a best practice for organizations doing collective editing to use accounts with a user's name and then an underscore and the company name. Example: eplack_EZRouting (if I worked there.) For inspiration, I suggest reviewing Lyft's list of users on GitHub. Setting up something like this would go a long way towards community acceptance. https://github.com/OSM-DCT-Lyft/US/wiki/OSM-Team-Members

Hi there,

I corrected this edit for you. The DWG has noticed a pattern of low quality or destructive edits that don't follow the community norms. Your use of a single account by multiple people also violates OSM policy. You must cease edits via a single account lest we block this account.

In this particular edit it would have been better to close the portion of the road that enters the private compound. Further you should not use access=no, but rather access=private for private areas. No means no one.

Please reach out at data@openstreetmap.org

Thanks,
Elliott Plack
Data Working Group
OpenStreetMap Foundation

Hi there. When adding these new gas station roads via Lyft's "proprietary imagery," would you please consider adding the gas station roofs and building?

Thanks,
Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group