This edit has been reverted in osm.org/changeset/96628933, see that changeset for details

See http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=3193667 and osm.org/changeset/76279772 for past examples

Thanks for the updates here, it looks great!

Hello,

With this change removing the left-turn slip roads, access from eastbound TCH to the road leading to Avoca Road (osm.org/way/184961615/ ) is no longer possible because there's no link between the 2 carriageways of TCH. Is this accurate?

iD doesn't ask - sorry - but source is survey today

Cheers! A lot of the other changes are fair enough, and I do think there was too many roads tagged as secondary downtown.

Just to let you know I'm thinking of putting together a more-or-less formal proposal to actually have some of the roads as primary, including Richmond, Adelaide, Lake Shore, and probably Jarvis. I will link you if I ever do complete and post it, to get your opinion on that.

--Jarek

Hello,

What is your logic for downgrading Richmond and Adelaide? These are the main car routes through downtown. Much of the stretch of King you've upgraded prohibits through traffic, too - that doesn't really square with being the top category in downtown.

Thanks,
--Jarek

Also changed some existing alignments which dated back to 2007

Hi SparklesMaster! As far as I can tell, you added the Old Highway 6 bridge near Little Current osm.org/way/530632710 in this edit. Current satellite imagery suggests that the old bridge no longer exists here. Do you happen to know if the satellite imagery is incorrect?

Hi rayleigh1,

Could you please take a look at osm.org/note/2294310 about these buildings?

Thank you

Please do not add fake things to the map.

Please do not add fake things to the map.

Rationale: the 404 extension is incomplete, alignments are pure speculation, and it has 0 chance of being built anytime soon.

Similarly the proposed streets/roads deleted do not appear in the York Region 10-year road plan approved in 2019 (see link in source tag), and no construction or grading is evident on imagery. A possibly reserved right-of-way or a connection of two existing road stretches is not a proposed road.

Also Telenav have not shown themselves to be particularly aware of local realities when mapping elsewhere in GTA. Editors who added these roads are no longer active in OSM so we can't follow-up for more information either.

Yes, it does take some time to reflect the changes on openstreetmap.org. Sometime a hard-reload (pressing ctrl-shift-r on a desktop browser) will make them appear. You might also sometimes see stale data at different zoom levels. This is because the map images are not regenerated live but are cached.

IMO it's valuable to tag them so people don't have the excuse of "GPS told me to drive here"

I live in the area so I can remove them if they're withdrawn. Most drivers also ignore the speed limits so shall we not tag those either?

Apparently this continues further north, but I didn't have a chance to survey. Surveyed at Queen and at Lobb intersections.

I changed the public transit relation for the GO 40 bus since it's PTv2. Didn't bother with the others as they're PTv1 so not crucial for routing anyway.

I didn't make the intersection between the south crosswalk way and the west sidewalk way because the west sidewalk is a single way all the way up to 16th which would give me a huge bounding box. Sorry, not sorry.

I got the rest of them in osm.org/changeset/83618630

Hi,

What are the sources for your additions of stores and restaurants across Canada?

Please remember that we are not allowed to copy other copyrighted data sources, such as other map services.

Thanks,
--Jarek