Seems I accidentally dragged a bit of Richmond Street along with the lane. Sorry about that, will fix at some point.

at Highway 407 station osm.org/way/671185119 we pray that the train comes? :) it got landuse=religious

Hello,

My understanding of osm.wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative (searching for Canada) and osm.wiki/Canada_admin_level is that giving Edmonton admin_level=4 makes it its own province. The fact that it's a provincial capital is indicated with capital=4.

Can you confirm that Edmonton has in fact seceded? :) Or am I misreading the tagging guidance?

Thanks,
Jarek

this changeset has been discussed in talk-ca https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2019-May/009307.html

Ah alright, thanks. I'm not super familiar - is an inclinator kind of like a really small funicular railway? For moving people up a hill?

I'm guessing you might have searched the editor presets for "cable car" or something similar - but unfortunately the one shown in the iD editor as "Cable Car" is an aerial cable car.

Of the OpenStreetMap categories, funicular is probably the closest. I'll let you fix it, no big rush.

Extra tip: If it is something like a funicular, generally in OSM "forward is up". Currently that would have it going from 15 green up to 16 tee - if that is not correct, right-click the way and reverse it.

Hi Paul,

A while back, you added an aerial cable car (a gondola) at the Mississaugua Golf & Country Club: osm.org/way/489344070

It is a straight line about 39 metres long, between the 15 green and the 16 tees.

Is there really a small aerial cable car there?

If not, do you know what might be in that location, and what it might have supposed to have been?

Thanks,
Jarek

I've also adjusted tracks I previously drew around Adelaide/Victoria - they didn't seem to match Esri now (or any imagery really) even though I tagged my initial drawing as based off Esri. Has Esri imagery shifted, or was I just crazy off?

Yes - but note that Andrew's edit was in 2011 and mine was in 2019 after I surveyed in 2019.

Hey Ezekiel,

Please read the note on osm.org/way/112648294

The current state in real world matches Esri imagery but not Bing.

Your edit moved the path to match Bing which means it is now incorrect.

Could you please correct it? Thanks

Housekeeping: This changeset has been discussed in the "imports" mailing list, please see https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2019-April/005967.html and follow-up messages.

Ah alright, that makes sense. Yeah the sub-meter accuracy is challenging, and it's not like a phone GPS will give us that resolution especially near to towers downtown. Maybe someone else has professional equipment and can give us a couple of readings to help guide the imagery... I guess City data is not yet license-cleared, if it even is accurate.

If I split and come to an imagery shift I'll leave a sharp transition as well, that's a good idea.

Hello,

What is the intended purpose of the area osm.org/way/679612843 which you described as parking=lane? Your edit summary says "rough postal area of M5H" but this is not tagged on the area itself. If it is the postal area, what is the source of the information?

Thanks,
--Jarek

Hey Nate, one more question. Do you know/remember which imagery and offset settings you used for the streetcar track alignment on Queen around McCaul? I was looking to continue this but can't find anything that matches. Do you have an offset programmed and if so can you share it?

Right but there are parts that can connect two non-motorway links, like osm.org/way/31122178 - in fact the entire route from T3 to Silver Dart, or the loop back from T1 to T3 osm.org/way/347398399. Are these technically under freeway regulations? Is this even defined in law, or a legal grey area?

Hm, I might need to dig through Mapillary/OSC or survey to double check...

Hi Kevo, I noticed your past edit to airport link roads here. I recently made a note osm.org/note/1702007 suggesting downgrading a whole bunch of the links that don't inescapably lead onto freeways to a lesser road class (some examples in the note). As you wrote here, several of these had and some still have foot=yes on them. Or are all the ways here currently tagged as motorway_link in fact explicitly forbidden to bicycles? If you have any thoughts on this could you comment on the note? Thanks!

I have deleted "Toronto (city)" in osm.org/changeset/69438590

It seems to me that most other such labels can probably be deleted as well (Kingston's is in the middle of a lake) but I don't know details about these other cities and some of the relations have had changes since, so I'll leave it to local or more experienced mappers.

Sorry, I meant Walmer, not Widmer. Got confused with the street between Peter and John.

Hello,

What is intended to be the meaning of the circular way osm.org/way/680992979 which has only
addr:street=yes as a tag? That it's an urban area? But the urban area here is much larger.

About the 510C, I passed by the Oxley @ Charlotte stop that it should be using (will be updating that area shortly) and the streetcar stop sign there says:

"September to June: No evening service Monday to Friday, no late evening service Saturday, Sunday or holidays. June to September: AM rush hours only Monday to Friday"

It doesn't exactly match well with the schedules posted on TTC website, and the schedules on the website make more sense in that TTC might want to keep 510s making turns out of the way of 504 cars especially during rush hours and frankly the extra run to Queens Quay probably doesn't take that much time but helps people at Cityplace. But that's the sign.

Individual schedules http://www.ttc.ca/Schedule/schedule.jsp?Route=510S&Stop=s.b._on_Spadina_Ave_at_Dundas_St_West_South_Side have only a few 510C runs in the evening turning back at King. I don't know if they actually run like that, could camp out at King and Spadina in the evening one day and check. But until they actually fully drop the 510C King designation we can probably keep it.

The wheelchair=limited might be left over from the initial roll-out, for example at Nassau osm.org/node/393549550/history it was added in September 2014 and not changed since. TTC shows the route and every stop as accessible so I think it's pretty safe to upgrade to wheelchair=yes. If you want to double-check in survey, check for the blue wheelchair symbols on stop poles.