Hello Harry,

Thank you for joining and contributing to OpenStreetMap. I have quickly reviewed your edits.

You have mistakenly added the house numbers to the 'name' key in the five houses you edited. "Name" should be used to add the proper name of an object in the map, and only the name (as opposed to a description, address, etc.). Most houses don't have names.

The address numbers you added should instead be tagged using the "addr:housenumber" key. I have made the change to 5212 as an example, refer to osm.org/way/590019548.

This consulting firm's offices are certainly not located in the middle of a shopping mall.

Based on the address you added, this office is located across the street and down a block; in the Royal Bank Building. Please be more mindful of where you're adding offices like this.

Good luck! :)

Hi,

Everyone appreciates your contributions, but please be careful when you're making changes. In the process of adding the Aura Spa on 4th St SW you inadvertently dragged a node on 11th Avenue far out of place. I've fixed the issue; please just be mindful.

Thanks.

You are making changes to administrative boundaries, but it is not clear what is it you've changed. Please elaborate in your changeset comments.

I see now that this was your first edit; thanks for participating and I hope you continue to contribute!

A little point of advice for you: you changed the names of Hochwald Ave west of Quesnay Wood Drive and Hochwald Court to "<roadname> (closed)". The "name" field is for the name of an object, not for a description. If you need to add a description you can, the iD editor can easily add it. In this case to show that the road is closed to traffic all you needed to do was change "access" to "no", which you did.

Again, thanks for contributing, I'm sure everyone appreciates having another local editor around.

Hi, I noticed that in your changes here you deleted a bunch of proposed roads in Currie Barracks. Is there any particular reason why you did this? They were added based on the plans in submitted to the City in LOC2014-0109. (see https://www.660citynews.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/sites/8/2015/02/currie-barracks-plans.jpg) The idea was the tagging from "highway=proposed" to "highway=residential" (or whatever) could be done later, after the roads are built. Deleting them just means someone will have to do them from scratch, again...

Hello Rodrigo Hausen,

You erroneously tagged the access to the affected roadways in this changeset with "access=no". This would mean no legal access to the public, which is patently obviously not the case here. I suggest you read a little bit more on how to map things in OSM. Please read osm.wiki/Key:access for more information.

Please don't let this discourage you from contributing to the project. I advise you select "I would like someone to review my edits" before clicking upload in your next few edits.

Have a nice day and happy mapping!

This arose because of a changeset (osm.org/changeset/67902257) wherein I politely asked for some clarification on why the user Rodrigo Hausen wholesale deleted sidewalk ways for no apparent reason. Interaction was polite until he condescended to me (despite the fact I have made an order of magnitude more edits...) and subsequently started going back through the changesets I've made looking for any small mistake to capitalize on. This was not an "experienced mapper" trying to politely help a "new(er) mapper": this was a haughty mapper trying to vindictively make a point.

You know what will really make the project go down the drain? Alienating experienced mappers with patronizing arrogance, like you've done right now. I make this thing better with free labour and you expect me to put up with being treated with pompous disdain?

To hell with this, I have better things to do.

Besides being a local who has lived here for decades and was taught at a young age that walking on the road isn't legal? Calgary Traffic Bylaw 26M96, section 6. Pedestrians are only allowed at crosswalks (marked or unmarked); setting foot on the street is otherwise illegal. For example here's a news story from a few years ago about the Calgary Police Service ticketing dozens of people for walking on a road: https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/08/13/calgary-jaywalking_n_5675155.html

I'm not going to argue the merits of whether that's a good thing or not, but the facts are just about every single road in Calgary is NOT legally "accessible" to pedestrians (the only notable exception being Stephen/8th Avenue between Macleod Trail SE and 3rd Street SW). I realize that that is likely not the case elsewhere, but it is a legal reality here. So deleting sidewalks—disconnected as they may be—on the assumption that pedestrians can walk along any road they want is in fact directing them to do something illegal.

First of all I didn't add ways 503864084 or 503865771. And if you actually looked at the changesets you'd see I was adding connections.

Second of all, 503864084 and 503865771 aren't connected to the roads in question simply because the crosswalks haven't been added yet. Rather than expending your energies adding fixme tags why don't you make yourself useful and add the crosswalks?

You were probably trying to be well-meaning here, but instead you're being a condescending prick. How about YOU select "I would like someone to review my edits" before clicking upload in YOUR next few edits? After all, you're the one who &^%$ed this area up by making an incorrect assumption.

Again, the sidewalks are important because without them there is no (legal) pedestrian access here. I don't really care if you want to map them separately or tag the road ways with "sidewalk=*", but don't delete one or the other and think you've solved a problem here. You didn't fix any routing issues: you made it worse. Again, your assumption that a pedestrian can (legally) walk along any of the roads in this area is WRONG; asinine as it may seem, where there are no sidewalks in this neighbourhood there is no (legal) pedestrian access!

My concern is you deleted these separate sidewalk ways without replacing them with the correct "sidewalk=" tagging on the road ways. You took something that was perhaps half-finished and deleted it for being "useless", and have now introduced a significant error because you made an incorrect assumption: you assumed the default access tagging on these roads is correct. In reality pedestrians are NOT allowed to walk on the road; this is typical of roads in North America. Horses are not allowed by law on either roads or sidewalks.

This is of particular concern in suburban neighbourhoods like the one you edited because they often only have sidewalks on one side of the road, or may not have them at all in which case it's still illegal for pedestrians to walk on the road.

If you can I would suggest reverting this change and fixing the access tagging on the roads instead.

Can you elaborate on why the sidewalks you deleted are "useless"? Were they *inaccurate*? That you noted them as "useless and disconnected" makes me think you believe the former because of the latter, which begs the question why you didn't connect them instead of delete them.

The name of the restaurant chain is just "Cora", not "Cora's". I have changed the name of this restaurant back.

"The Family of Man" a.k.a. "Brotherhood of Mankind" statues by Armengol are already on the map.

These paths don't intersect. The ramp for cyclists and mobility-impaired users is below the bridge to the stairs.

Hi Charlie,

FYI you don't need to (and shouldn't) tag a garage, or any other building, with a name if it doesn't have one. The name field is used where something on the map actually has one, e.g. many of the buildings downtown (The Bow, Brookfield Place, etc.). Please don't put a description in the name field either; there's a separate field for descriptions. (I.e. it's self-evident that this garage is the one associated with the house at 1135 Riverdale Ave, because you also gave the garage the address, so don't add this to the name)

Also note that there is a separate tag for garage buildings; you shouldn't tag them as a house and use the name field to describe them as a garage.

Thanks, and happy mapping.

Furthermore changing "Bow Valley Parkway" to "Highway 1A (west)" is similarly confusing. No offense, but what are you trying to accomplish?

Changing "Crowchild Trail NW" to "Highway 1A (east) (Crowchild Trail NW)" has not "fixed the name to prevent confusion". In fact the new name is more confusing than before (was the old name ever confusing?). Like, what is the "(east)" in the name supposed to mean? it's certainly not the direction of travel, because the relation encompasses both...