Hey, I meant disposal for the small gas stove canisters... gas_bottles may be more correct? Ex: https://www.mec.ca/en/product/4010-931/230-butane-propane-canister
Thanks,
Kevin

Thanks! It's a private road (owned by UW) with low traffic and low speed limit so a tertiary classification makes little sense.

There are always a lot of new users in the area so it's not surprising that there are changes like that being made...

In that case I tried the new measure tool in StreetComplete (uses the camera). If it's a road width (like Main/King) that I added, then it's usually by making a measurement in JOSM.

Yeah, growing up in the suburbs it's so interesting to learn that a house has a name instead of just a number. One of those neat quirks of a very old neighbourhood!

No worries. It's a bit of a pain because I always need to wonder about all of the little routing possibilities as I go along and end up missing some.

Dude, seriously. This isn't a playground where you can just change things because you want to. Please use opengeofiction.net/ to create your "future developments in the GTA" to your heart's content.

Your edits consistently break aspects of the map and then the rest of us need to clean up your mess. If you continue, please follow the rules and start off small instead of trying to edit major things.

Hey - oops! Thanks for the heads up, I've changed it to construction zone. I remember thinking it was weird that those houses were missing. If I make a mistake like that in the future feel free to fix it up and my feelings won't be hurt ;). Sometimes when I'm focused on one thing I touch up others along the way based on imagery.
Thanks,
Kevin

Please stop adding "future developments" - the map must only show what is happening. 90% of the construction items you add aren't actually construction but still farm fields. Please see here: osm.wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dconstruction
"A site which is under active development and construction of a building or structure, including any purposeful alteration to the land or vegetation upon it. Abandoned construction projects and sites should not use this tag. "

Please stop adding theoretical construction or construction that is not taking place, as that's vandalism.

Hey! Just a heads up when you're adding cycleways - check the corresponding road as chances are the cycleway has already been added through tags, so remove it to avoid duplication. I've fixed the duplication along Hunter St.

When also add an separate cycleway routing becomes easier to break, so ensure you connect the cycleway with any highways (streets, alleys, parking lots, etc.) that can be turned on to or off of the cycleway (ex: @ Hunter or Springer Sts).

Happy mapping & cheers,
Kevin

Andrew, if you're going to not edit the map properly, please don't bother editing at all. Many of your edits are incorrect, don't exist/are imaginary, or shouldn't be mapped. Please start with simpler things and review how to documents https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/

Most of these edits are pretty close to vandalism, whether intentional or not. Please stop making changes and edits that do not exist and please stop turning address ranges into roads that do not exist.

If you're going to mark the new traffic pattern, please also appropriately name the roads, mark the speed limits, add reference numbers, add lane counts, and create the correct topography from your observations. We've had a lot of bad edits along the 401 recently so we're trying to avoid it from becoming a mess. Thanks, Kevin

Dude, you need to be careful with your edits - you changed an address range to a secondary road. You also mapped Chinguacousy Rd as separated, when it's not and broke the addresses ranges on two roads when you did that. This isn't a playground, you need to be careful. Please start off simple with your map edits and learn as you go, as your edits are constantly and consistently wrong/bad. Please check out the LearnOSM guides: https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/

Also, for new roads (proposed/under construction) it's good practise to put the source so people know the accuracy (ex: GPS, Bing imagery, etc.)

Please stop marking the 401 areas under construction as open - they are not open. You should only map things that exist and these do not exist yet.

Traffic lights should not be added where there are no actual traffic lights that exist.

Also, many of your edits were of roads and other changes that haven't even begun. Only changes that have happened or are actively underway should be mapped.

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