I guess I'd have to lobby the local government to build a road through that forest, splitting it in two parts!

Thank you for your comment, I will keep that in mind for future additions. I was going for the maximum to keep the number of members for the relation as low as possible (without having to sacrifice detail) because they easily get into the hunderets after adding all the clearings. But having a few more outer members will not make a big difference I suppose.

Thank you for adding the buildings! Please don't add any tags to the nodes, only the way when mapping buildings. The corners of the building don't need an extra "building=house" tag.

Thank you and happy mapping!

Hello Jake,

Thank you for adding all that info to the camping sites. Please note that the correct tag for dog is singular and not plural. See osm.wiki/Key:dog
I fixed this here and at the Lake Benmore site.
Thank you and happy mapping!
Jonas

Damit bist du nicht allein! Habe einen Telegram-Bot, der mir immer eine Nachricht schreibt, wenn jemand was mit dogs=* taggt, und das kommt alle 2-3 Tage vor. Ich verstehe auch nicht, warum das sorum festgelegt wurde, aber Hauptsache es ist überall gleich und so, wie externe Dienste es im OSM-Datensatz erwarten.

Danke für den Hinweis, ich habe das korrigiert.

That would be great , thank you!
Access=yes is not strictly necessary if you also have those more specific users, but it doesn't hurt I guess.
If you want to be even more granular, there are a bunch of possible values for the access tag, although I presume they don't apply to this kind of path: osm.wiki/Key:access

Happy mapping!

Hi,
Did you mean to change Hemmed-In-Hollow Trail to access=no? Because if it is an accessible footpath, it should not have this tagging. If you mean access for vehicles, this would be the more appropriate tag: osm.wiki/Key:motor_vehicle. Access=no is only supposed to be used on paths that are actually impossible to access.

Hello,

Thank you for adding these buildings. Please make sure to make them have 90° angles. In the ID editor, you can hit the Q key when you have a building selected and it will automatically make it a rectangle.
Thanks and happy mapping!

Hallo,
vielen Dank für das Hinzufügen der Details und Informationen für diese POIs. Bitte beachte, dass der richtige Tag für Hunde im Singular, also dog statt dogs ist. Ich habe das im Hotel Kleiner Markt und gestern bei den Schlossberghöhlen korrigiert.
osm.wiki/DE:Key:dog
Vielen Dank und frohes Kartieren!

You changed several areas of woodland to natural=tree. Please note that this is not the correct tag to use, because natural=tree is only supposed to be used on nodes, marking individual trees, not whole areas. I fixed it.

Hello,
I have noticed you sometimes use the key dogs=*. Please note that the correct one to use is dog=*. See osm.wiki/Key:dog. The correct tag for horse is also singular.

Thank you and happy mapping!

Hello,
thank you for the contribution! I just changed all tags with dogs=* to dog=*, as that is the right tag to use (see osm.wiki/Key:dog). Please keep that in mind for future edits.

Happy mapping!
Jonas

Didnt notice I still had that farmyard in my editor when I got the notification for the wrong tree, I apologize for the huge changeset.

They're just there. They're very common in this part of Colorado, mostly with intermittent water. I didn't draw the water here because it isn't clear to me where exactly it would go, but from what I understand, when it rains, it pours, and there are hunderets of those little water reservoirs with earth dams.

Thanks for your comment, I made this edit this big by accident.

The right discription would be:

Changed dogs=* to dog=* (see osm.wiki/Key:dog)

Hello,
I have noticed that you tagged a lot of features with dog=voice_control. This is an uncommon tag that is only in use in this area. What do you mean by it? Are dogs allowed as long as the owners make sure they're quiet? Is there an official sign or something similar around to communicate such a rule?
If it's actually like that, I would suggest using dog=yes and note=* instead, using the note tag to explain this rule.
Thanks and happy mapping!

Hallo Alex,

Danke für deine Nachricht!
Ich habe (fast) immer nur Bäume dort entfernt, wo sie wirklich entgültig entfernt wurden, zum Beispiel im Rahmen von größeren Baustellen.
Zu den Baumscheiben: Ja, das stimmt, aber solange kein neuer Baum dort steht, finde ich es nicht sinnvoll, einzutragen, dass theoretisch hier einer stehen könnte. Den einzigen Sinn eines "hier stand mal ein Baum"-Tags sehe ich dann, wenn noch ein Stumpf da steht, wobei ich dann auch das Eintragen des Stumpfes persönlich schöner finde als das Eintragen eines ehemaligen Baums. Schließlich soll OSM ja den Ist-Zustand darstellen, nicht den War-Zustand.
Grundsätzlich ist das für mich ein Datenhygiene-Ding. Tags sollten möglichst einheitlich und eindeutig sein, damit die Daten vielfältig und einfach auswertbar sind. Durch solche Aktionen versuche ich, dazu einen Beitrag zu leisten. Sei es das Ändern von removed:tree zu stump oder das Entfernen der Bäume, wo in nächster Zeit ziemlich sicher kein neuer nachgepflanzt wird.

Viele Grüße
Jonas

Привет, большое спасибо за внесение деревьев! Пожалуйста, обрати внимание, что ряды деревьев должны быть обозначены как "natural=tree_row", а не "natural=tree". Я уже это изменил.

Hi,
I'm aware of that rule but for a mass change in false tags I think this exception is valid.