This matches up well with what I’ve done with a nearby area of national forest: osm.org/#map=10/46.1313/-86.5482

I haven’t made an explicit effort to ground check much of it, but I’ve crossed checked it with USFS data. There is a imagery layer that available that shows the USFS data:

osm.org/user/Richard/diary/26099

Though I’ve found it more useful to get the source data from https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/datasets.php and load an extract of it into JOSM, after adding some OSM tagging ( https://gist.github.com/maxerickson/32ca41e72458b12a5734f97f75800448 ) to get nicer styling.

mvexel, could you explain how to find the challenge creator on MapRoulette?

I can’t work out how to do it.

There are several messaging systems for OpenStreetMap.

Part of participating in the community is doing your best to respond to messages, as messages from other users are one of the main ways of giving feedback and resolving questions about what an edit means.

In the US we have many fast food restaurants that do not serve burgers; tacos, chicken, sandwiches and various Asian fusion places are some big categories.

As to the broader point, if the cuisine tags in an area are incomplete or too messy to use, ignoring them is just as effective as not storing them.

Glassman, did the “Set WMS Bookmark” method mentioned on the github.io page not work?

Hi Glassman if you go to the linked github.io page, from there you can click one of the links like ‘Alabama_2015_1m’ to add the NAIP layer for that state in JOSM.

In the Midwest we also have Mills Fleet Farm and Blain’s Farm & Fleet (both modest sized chains). There’s a Wikipedia category: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Farm_and_ranch_supply_stores_of_the_United_States

Sure I understand the desire to capture that it has lots of pet related merchandise.

The downside is that most data consumers will not interpret the tag at all if there is a semicolon. I guess given the low usage to date of farm_supply it doesn’t make much difference.

Is there a reason to double up phone and website? I think using one scheme or the other is sufficient and makes updates easier. Maybe not an issue for a single chain, but I think using both shouldn’t be encouraged as a general practice.

(in my opinion all the “contact:” scheme really adds is 8 characters, but it isn’t worth much arguing, it’s trivial for data users to consume all the various tags).

I would also give some consideration to shop=farm_supply without pet, shop is a key where multiple values don’t make sense to me. It’s been a while since I was in one, but I guess TS isn’t anymore of a pet store than say Walmart. Maybe pet=yes or petfood=yes to capture that part of the business?

With the OpenData plugin you can open shape files directly in JOSM:

osm.wiki/JOSM/Plugins/OpenData

(The result should be about the same, I’m thinking the installation process for the plugin is a lot easier than gdal)

CSV output is handy for this type of Overpass query:

osm.wiki/Overpass_API/Overpass_QL#Output_Format_.28out.29

A while later a different way of finding the mixed character names occurred to me. Look for names that have characters in a-z and also not in a-z.

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/jC1

[out:json][timeout:25];
way["highway"]["name"~"[a-z]",i]["name"~"[^a-z0-9 \.-]",i]({{bbox}});
out center;

@BushmanK the boundary relations don’t factor into the label placement or sizing.

I do see population data on the place nodes.

osm.org/node/151538698

osm.org/node/151370941

It may be a good idea to revisit that diary entry.

For instance, you can check what tags are considered by some open source routers.

Here are two that don’t consider it at all:

https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/blob/master/profiles/car.lua

https://github.com/osmandapp/OsmAnd-resources/blob/master/routing/routing.xml

I would be surprised if many routers would take the tag into account, as they look directly at the connectivity between the roads, and a road having a single connection is a common and simple situation.

Using https://www.google.com/search?num=20&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.openstreetmap.org%2Fuser%2F+noexit%3Dyes to search, I only find a couple of entries, one complaining about the tag being added to ways.

osm.org/user/AndiG88/diary/35085

You can use Overpass Turbo to generate a gpx file showing OSM objects with a certain tag. For example, here’s tiger:review=no:

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/i7W

I’ve used out center to simplify the streets to single nodes. To get a gpx, click the export button.

Not with much certainty. I guess marking the locations where a cemetery is clearly visible would work well.

I looked at a few of the locations in the challenge. This one:

http://maproulette.org/map/85/84564

Doesn’t really look like a cemetery, but I think it is quite likely that the untilled area by the junction just to the southwest is a cemetery (there’s also a hint of a fence).

I wouldn’t rule out the patch of grass being a cemetery. An older cemetery may have only had small or temporary markers and they often go untended.

Are there any plans to try to include estimates of edit quality in the assessment of mappers?

I think it is somewhat reasonable to assume that people that do more mapping will improve over time, but it’s a little concerning that things like gamification and representations of quality might be based strictly on volume.

Did you subscribe to the imports mailing list and start a discussion of the import?

osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines#Step_5_-_Import_Review

Note that this is necessary, discussion on talk-us or imports-us is not enough.

For future reference, here is an overpass script for checking that each county has admin_centre and label roles, and a wikipedia link:

[out:json][bbox:{{bbox}}];
rel[admin_level=6]->.counties;
node(r.counties:"label")->.labels;
rel(bn.labels) ->.labelcounties;
node(r.counties:"admin_centre")->.admins;
rel(bn.admins) ->.admincounties;
(.counties - .labelcounties)->.nolabel;
(.counties - .admincounties)->.noadmin;
(
.nolabel;
.noadmin;
rel[admin_level=6][wikipedia!~"."];
);
out geom;

And a link: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/dW6

At the moment, most counties are in good shape. The biggest outstanding issues are the independent cities in Virginia and the counties in Connecticut (which are no longer administrative entities). Other than those issues, it’s mostly false positives, where the region does not really have an administrative center.