Thanks for fixing it and for the additional info! :)

Ah shoot, thanks for the heads up. Maybe my JOSM isn't up to date with the tagging changes. I'll take a look with overpass turbo to try and find/fix the issues.

Hey there, :)
Just wanted to discuss this change since former Hwy 518 is on the edge between unclassified and tertiary (in my mind). I'm slightly more in the tertiary classification camp because it ties together the local roads and logging roads and has been built to a higher standard than roads built by the town/district. Or do you think the traffic volume alone is enough to make it unclassified? Thoughts?
-Kevin

Hey Danny, thanks for the revert. My main concern about it was related to: (1) the then need for massive changes to fit the new standard across the province (although mainly in the Greater Golden Horseshoe) and (2) the definition of having been a Provincial highway in the past. The latter is a bit of a hard one to use as a definition because the Province no longer considered those portions to be important provincial routes as they were superseded by 400-Series roads. There was some discussion a couple of years ago in Talk-CA about it and everything was left status-quo as there wasn't much agreement with what to do. Times have changed since then and there wasn't much of an impetus to push it forward.

My concern with "local knowledge" came from my daily experience with the roads from commuting and for work and knowledge of the traffic volumes - if it were based solely on volume and number of lanes, then there would be a fair number of roads in Peel that would become primary, such as Steeles, Queen, Bovaird, Dixie, Burnhamthorpe, etc. and I found that providing the speed limits helped in terms of routing as it provided a better indicator of travel times than the road hierarchy. Another example would be Queen St @ Main St - the throughput, size of the road, and ban on truck traffic would make it a poor candidate for a primary road, while west of the 410 it's been built for huge throughput and is a truck route.

While I am sorry for my changeset comments, it was due to the how I interpreted in your responses I received in this changeset followed by your immediate upgrade of Lakeshore Rd a couple of minutes later. I know you've been a large editor of Brampton and I appreciate it, but we should probably have a thread about upgrading the classification scheme on Talk-CA (or at least a chat with other local mappers) so that most of the editors in the province don't suddenly see what's been the status quo for 15 years change overnight. It would also be better for us to have a comprehensive network of actual primary roads in the province rather than piecemeal changes. I know you're not a fan of Talk-CA, but communicating over the internet isn't the easiest thing in the world. :P If you would like me to bring up a proposal and post it to Talk-CA I can write something up and share it with you before posting?

Cheers,
Kevin

Ah great, more low traffic 2 lane roads that you have no knowledge of will arbitrarily be made primary. Not only is this a Ontario standard, but a US standard too, with only State and higher highways being considered primary.

So you would revert them back even though you don't have local knowledge of the area compared with the people that travel on these roads daily? What about Highways 2, 5, 6, & 11/11B that are no longer provincial highway system? What is "too few primary roads"? Compared to what?

Er, why did Queen, Bovaird, and Main/Hurontario Streets all become Primary roads when none of them are King's Highway (except Hwy 10 N of Hwy 410)? The classification scheme doesn't fit in with the prevailing Ontario classification scheme and the only online map that shows the roads like this is Google Maps. I'll likely revert these changes back to the proper classification as per local GTA mapping custom if there isn't a good reason.

Hi Justin,

Thanks for contributing and improving OpenStreetMap. I've noticed that some of your changes made entire lengths of roads set to culverts or entire lengths of streams set to culverts.

The proper way to tag a culvert (or any sort of bridge or tunnel) would be to only have the part of the stream that is actually underground be set to being in a culvert. You will need to split the stream twice and then do the tagging for the part underground. I've done an example here: osm.org/way/695885377

Tell me if you have any questions and I can try to help out!

Cheers,
Kevin

Where the 409 ends (and it's ramp system to Airport Rd) is essentially where the roads cease to (a) be a 400 Series Highway and (b) are no longer on Provincial Land. The TPIA side of Airport Rd is all their land I believe. This is how MNR has it classified: https://imgur.com/Uc9iKdj - whether or not it's right in OSM context is another thing. :P

I believe they're tagged as motorway_link because they're linking to and from motorways (409/427) - a lot used to be a single segment to/from the motorway to service roads but I chopped them up for improving routing queues.

The ramp system at TPIA is so complex that it was kept that way because many of them were connecting to or from some sort of motorway.

Correct - motorway_link shouldn't allow bike or foot. The only way into the airport by bike or foot are the local roads like American Dr or Jetliner Rd.

Hey Manuel,

I've added them in the past to GO or transit stations because they have Kiss n Ride painted on the road or on signs around it. I guess it's not really needed if you think they shouldn't be there.
-Kevin

The removed vandalism was referring to a building that was changed to a park and the node that was a park but someone had added to a boundary relation. There's been a bunch of new users adding parks and meadows for Pokémon Go that don't exist.

In relation to the boundary, i only continued what had been created originally. In most of this area roads are the boundary line and have been for 200 years when they were first surveyed.

I believe I fixed all of the problems, PierZen. I did it manually rather than reverting, which can cause other problems.
Please tell me if you find any other problems I created and I'll be glad to fix them.
My apologies, have a good night.

Hi PierZen - I'll take a look at this changeset and the other changeset you commented on tonight.

Sorry about that

Why were parking aisles and laneways across a huge chunk of the city turned to highway=residential??

You wrongly tagged values that were already added in correctly and made them incorrect...

Just a heads up when using the City of Brampton's street data - any road that has a "CONSTRUCTION STATUS" of something other than "REGISTERED" means that it hasn't been approved by the city or finalised by the developer. The street layout and street names can change up until the subdivision plan is registered.

Fixed those tags on the 401.

Oops, thanks for catching that. I'll fix that when I have some free time this weekend. :)

"been on-the-ground quality of Canvec's hydrological data"

If you're talking about on-the-ground checks in areas like this changeset, you've proven that you're unqualified to make decisions on data in a country that is 30 times bigger than your own. This land is still essentially unexplored and a vast majority of it is impassable even on foot.

If you're going to mass revert areas far outside the realm of your knowledge, at least send a message to the talk-ca list instead of unilaterally reverting changes from 6,000km away while preaching that this is a "craft mapping" project to users who actually understand their country.

It's cute when Europeans think they understand Canada and it's been getting on my nerves for a while.

Most of the restrictions like this are common sense for Ontario drivers and aren't signed. The example you cite also has a solid white line until you're merged with the flow of traffic and the centre line is double solid yellow, making a left turn legally impossible. Furthermore, there is a ramp a couple of hundred metres back for northbound Don Mills, so you wouldn't use this ramp do go northbound.