Greetings. What is the source of these boundaries named as orders? Is that name (the changeset name) something that can be observed on the ground, on a sign. If you could amend the boundary with sources, we'd appreciate it.

Elliott Plack
OSM Foundation
Data Working Group

Yes, there are roads on military based that are open to the public but this is the exception rather than the norm. Garrison commanders can raise the FPCON at any time and limit the accessibility of the base (in areas behind the gates).

What I don't want to see is you (or anyone) make general edits to military installations without checking conditions. There have been a number of DWG cases lately where people make edits to bases over access, only to be reverted. Their reasoning is around being unable to route their [insert delivery app name] there. That is a software problem however. Routers can permit access over private routes if the developer desires to allow this.

Agreed, all roads on the base, any US DOD installation should be access=private. You can make them private=military although that is still under active discussion on the forum. Think of it like this, say you’re out jogging and approach the gate of an installation. You ask a guard hey can I go in there and run around? Of course, the guy at the gate will probably say GFY especially at bases around here like Fort Meade. Permitted access tagging in OSM is for things where the public and generally get the permit. Joining the military or obtaining a secret security clearance does not meet that bar.

Henry, Good find, I think you're exactly right. I was aware of the little stub being public and am not sure why I changed it to private. I've been down there many times as my parents lived nearby until just recently. I've just edited it back though I did not merge it so as to preserve history. osm.org/changeset/158918234

Robert, one improvement is to be sure to connect any sidewalks to an adjacent roadway for routing. you can add a crossing, even if unmarked, at any intersection.

Hi there, nice work on tidying up. Please do consider something more descriptive in your comments beyond "update". Also, regarding disassociating nodes from buildings, e.g., at Walgreens, it is fine to leave them merged. I will take care of that. Not everyone enters at the entrance. You can map the entrances though if you like.

Hi there. Elliott here from the DWG. In this changeset some bus stops were misattributed from the Charm City Circulator to the Maryland Transit Adminstration. These services run indepentently and often utilize different stops. Could you look back at this changeset at ones that moved the operator to MTA from CCC? https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=145094255

Example: osm.org/node/1994082203

In the example, the MTA does not serve the Harbor Point area.

Hi! Elliott here from the forum. Regarding tiger cleanup I recommend clearing all those tags as a symbol that someone has cleaned it up. Some argue keeping those tags but at this point they are some 15 years removed from the TIGER dataset. The community forum will always have something to say on this topic.

My approach is to clear all of them and then set the surface. Since the surface isn't in the import and it often either asphalt or concrete, it is an easy way to say someone has been here and looked at it.

Hey there, thanks for doing that!

Thanks for doing this but please report these sorts of things to DWG so we can take it up with the user. In this case they have gone on to make more bad edits (which you can feel free to revert if you'd like)

Hi there, Elliott here with the OSMF Data Working Group. How exactly was this speed limit field verified? According to the Maryland SHA, the entire beltway is 55 MPH: https://data-maryland.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/maryland::mdot-sha-roadway-posted-speed-limit-signs/about

Additionally much of this area is under a speed limit reduction for a temporary work zone, where speeds are dropped lower than 55 during construction.

In other changesets you've set the DC beltway to 70 MPH yet it is also 55. Why did you do this?

Aaron! I love to see that you're back mapping. How are you doing? I'd love to catch up sometime. -Elliott

thanks for the corrections while working on the import!

Review:

1. If you know this to be paved in asphalt or concrete, please do specify that the surface is one of those options. "paved" is generic.

2. try to vary your changeset comments a bit, such as noting when you have noticed the change or what is unique about one road or another.

Thanks for adding your local knowledge to the map!

Welcome, thanks for adding this school!

Hi there, someone recently deleted this park. Please discuss: osm.org/changeset/153750960

This changeset deleted a number of parks without explanation. Please see osm.org/user_blocks/16430 and comment as to the reason for these deletions.

Nick, you should report these issues to Lyft (and the Data Working Group) before fixing them. That way Lyft will not simply roll them back. I've commented on Lyft's changeset to get you started.

Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group

Hi there. Whether or not a road is on private property on a "GIS map" is immaterial to how it should be tagged in OSM. It is possible for a public road to be on private property, such as via an easement, or when the GIS is out of date. Further, any GIS data you are using to cross reference against OSM needs to be vetted through the import process. See osm.wiki/How_We_Map "don't copy copyrighted data without permission"

We need a written sign off from the city that they are ok with you using their data to update OSM unless the city's data is public domain.

Before referencing any more city maps into OSM, I suggest proposing an import following the instructions here: osm.wiki/Import

Thanks,

Elliott Plack
OSMF Data Working Group