Hello there, and welcome to OpenStreetMap. I hope you've been welcomed already! I see you're into Strava and mapping for exercise routing. I am into that as well, so I can appreciate this sort of edit, but there are some OSM norms to be aware of when working around routing. The map and data is for many purposes and so it should be maintained considering all of them. These BGE tracks are real paths and the utility companies may use this data for their purposes. I like to jog along these paths and came across a BGE crew once. They said it is fine to run there, the no trespassing only applies to motor vehicles (they don't want cars or ATVs back there). BGE typically owns the land in Maryland parks where the power line tracks become paths too. Technically they would be considered private the same as this, but of course, that is not the case. Therefore, it is best to leave these sorts of paths in and call them highway=track, which are unmaintained, typically unpaved roads, used for utility vehicle access. I map the ones along the BGE rights of way, railroads, and fire roads in the reservoirs this way. Keep up the good mapping! -Elliott

Thank you for working on my challenge!

Yes, rivers do change over time. The original shape was imported as a census designated place boundary, thus why I'd adjusted it in this changeset. Your revision looks fine though, just don't break the relations.

Solid work! I recommend adding the smoothness tag as well, as it looks good in cycle maps

"zoning=waste_waterplant" is not a valid tag and suggests little understanding of American land use laws and norms. In the United States, industrial areas are defined not by zoning but the parcel/property owner. Most of these sites are fenced and have signage along the boundary that says no trespassing, so it is disingenuous to essentially untag them.

osm.org/way/484725220#map=16/38.5315/-76.5685

This entire power plant was deleted: osm.org/relation/1043175/history

Hi there, I'm curious as to how you've just joined the project and have decided to make these sweeping changes to the map. This sort of landuse work is complicated and requires local consensus and discussion. Deleting relations is never appropriate for an established place. Care to explain any of these drastic changes?

Hey Sparks, take a look at a recent edit here, does this look good to you? Dropped the park tag.

osm.org/changeset/112788527

I am not suggesting all accounts that do this are fake, but I’ve tracked dozens of upstart accounts that are created solely to change the tagging of parks. You, map per, are obviously not a fake account.

Notwithstanding, what is it about the tagging of parks in the US that draws you to make these sorts of edits? What is your interest? I am genuinely curious and want to understand. I see you’re typically most active around Munich. Not that there is any restriction to work elsewhere in the world but why this park?

Have a look, someone changed it again. I changed it back though. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/relation/6077602
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108384740

https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/relation/6077602

Here you can see that your account and several other generic/probably fake or throwaway accounts have a history of removing the tag.

Hi there. This national park is commonly accepted as a leisure=park here and has been tagged that way for a long time. It is not a "fix" to remove the tag. This is a linear park where most of the land is used for active recreation. If you look through the history this has been untagged as a park and then it is added back over and over. Please, don't contribute to that. If you want to raise the issue in tagging or talk-us, please do, but the locals agree it is a park.

Either at the top or the bottom is fine. Those don't have a lot of use though, it is usually better/simpler in my opinion to make separate routes for the bypasses and such and then use a superroute to capture them all.

Update, one other thing. I made the non-casual part of the RCG route an MTB relation. osm.org/changeset/112718732#map=16/39.0225/-76.9972

Got it. I took a crack at reordering the various route relations so that everything should be pretty good now. Put in some new geometry from MoCo too. osm.org/changeset/112718562

Looking good here, though I think the RCG is now double mapped with the NBT Mtn. Bike Trail. Should the Rachel Carson Greenway (RCG) overlap the Northwest Branch Trail (NBT)?

Darn clipboard! This one :)

osm.org/relation/13327825

Thanks! Sorry meant this relation (the spur) osm.org/relation/1778673

You can see I put it on the north side of the new configuration for now. I’ve put out an inquiry with the ECG folks but since it’s under construction you’re right they probably won’t sign it right away. If you see anything pop up let me know. DC has all the best bike infrastructure!

Thanks again,
Elliott (in Baltimore)

I have emailed PG parks to see if they know.