Also named Banklick Creek and removed it from boundary relations.

Note that routers assume foot=no for highway=cycleway, I suppose because bike-only cycleways are common in Europe. Fixed in changeset 66035531.

…maneuver override, athletic fields

I moved a couple addresses from garages to nearby existing buildings in changeset 65623166.

I got a bit carried away here by carrying out this change across the state, rather than in the corner of the state where I usually map. I’ve written up a proposal for standardizing on the “SR” prefix here: osm.wiki/Talk:Indiana#SR_for_state_roads

I’m not sure all of these should be place=suburb. German Village Historic District is definitely neighborhood-level, as are most NRHP districts.

Until now, I think place=suburb had only been used for places within a place=city in Ohio, not within a place=town. I’ve always thought of place=suburb as being sort of equal in rank to place=town except lying within a place=city, and renderers such as osm-carto have reflected that. With this change, we may want to promote Hamilton to a city, but that’s problematic because it isn’t the core of a metropolitan area.

This changeset incorrectly changed the name of an airport to that of one of its service roads. Fixed in changeset 64714662.

Changeset 64645689 restores the historic school POI, separating it from the turning circle.

Hi, thanks for your contribution to OSM. Unfortunately, you inadvertently deleted Bhopal’s city label from the map by turning it into a government office. I undid this changeset and your following two changesets in changeset 64617015 but restored the Smart City Bhopal POI in changeset 64617043. In the future, when you want to add a new POI, such as a business or office, please add a new point rather than modifying an existing one. (When editing the map in iD, press the Point button in the toolbar to add a new point.)

Regardless, I encourage you to continue contributing to OSM. We all make mistakes, but the map ultimately gets better because of people like you. Best regards.

I restored the Smart City Bhopal office POI as a separate POI in changeset 64617043.

One option, by analogy with underground parking structures and natural caves, is to avoid mapping the whole structure as a building (but maybe as something else) and focus on mapping only the entrances as features in their own right.

There are established ways of tagging underground subway stations and tunnels, but not subterranean developments in general that I know of. https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/552 tracks rendering such structures in a sensible way.

Añadir los códigos FIPS 6-4 en las relaciones de límites de municipios de Puerto Rico.

Independent cities have both FIPS 6-4 and FIPS 55-3 codes. This changeset only adds FIPS 6-4 codes, for consistency with other county-level administrative boundary relations. A future change that introduces FIPS 55-3 codes for all municipalities would have to figure out where the codes should go on independent cities.

I think this was the remnants of a relation that originally excluded this area. It makes no sense for these neighborhoods to be simultaneously part of a city and “unincorporated”. I deleted the relation outright in changeset 62894835.

I noticed that this reversion touched a number of address points like node 5021351015. The Vietnamese urban address format is not a great fit for the addr:* tagging scheme, so something like addr:housenumber=7/14/12/3/23 wouldn’t strike me as a bad import but rather an honest attempt at shoehorning a real address into existing tags.

Thanks! By the way, I changed the shared driveway to service=pipestem and documented my reasoning in osm.wiki/Talk:Tag:service%3Ddriveway#Pipestems. Feel free to join that discussion or start a new one in the tagging@ mailing list.

By the way, the Mapbox imagery layer has the most recent imagery in this part of Northern Kentucky.

Made some corrections in changeset 62255924. If you repurpose a traffic light node on an approach into a crosswalk node, remember to treat all approaches equally and add the traffic light somewhere else within the intersection.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62083662

Made some corrections in changeset 62254954. Remember to keep crosswalks separate from traffic light nodes (in the event that traffic lights were mapped on approaches instead of at intersection nodes) and connect crosswalks to the road network.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61703323