Hi Matthew,
That makes sense. From what I can see, the city seems to use "qualifier" for letters, and "unitid" for numbers (a few rare units have both).
I was somehow unaware of the Meetup this Friday (Meetup stopped emailing me for some reason). Thanks for the reminder - I will attend.

Hi Matthew,
I notice that you've been moving unit numbers into the main address - e.g. replacing addr:unit="A" and addr:housenumber="4" with addr:housenumber="4 A" (for 4 A Crystal Beach Drive). I'm not sure what this is based on - the city describes "A" as a "Unit ID", and, for most purposes, keeping the address and unit number separate should make further processing easier. The Mapnik rendering shows addr:housenumber="4" and addr:unit="A" as 4 A, although JOSM annoyingly refuses to display the unit number.

Is there something that I'm missing?

The City of Ottawa addressing data doesn't have unit numbers for buildings in Accora Village, but they are visible on the ground.

Yep, Acceptance Place is correct. I was confused by the name change at the intersection of Summergaze Street. I have made the correction.

I don't think the city is wrong - its classification system is just different from that of OSM. The city has three categories for road status ("comwork", "open", and "operational") while OSM has two (highway=construction and highway=*) with the city's middle category roughly split between OSM's two categories.

I think waiting until the road is "operational" is probably the way to go, in the absence of a survey/other evidence. Better to err on the side of not including roads, rather than including non-existent roads. A lot of "open" roads seem to be boundary cases; they exist at their final alignment, but they aren't yet paved, and they have the feel of being construction sites. Someone directed to take them by routing software may well be unhappy.

Jerome Jodoin Drive is not open (yet), based on my survey on Sunday, although there is a track following the future roadway. I think highway=construction is the best description at this point.

Hi Matthew,
I somehow missed the address file in the Ottawa Open Data portal, since it is not in the geography&maps group. Thanks for pointing that out. I agree that the addresses should be on Clenning.

changeset comment should be "added government office in Attawapiskat"

Hi Matthew,
An address on Clenning Street makes more sense. I've corrected the addresses. What is your source, by the way? GeoOttawa shows the units as part of 16 Kilbarron.

Actually the source was Esri World Imagery

Hi Matthew,
Isn't Épinettes Avenue generally known as Des Épinettes Avenue, not Épinettes Avenue? All Google search results seem to be for Des Épinettes, the bus stops are named Des Épinettes, the street signs/geoOttawa call it av. des Épinettes Av. (see https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/91NzZ8NiMm1AECSVlLBmOA). In all cases, the "des" is part of the name (somewhat ambiguously in the case of geoOttawa). Similar streets nearby also have "des" as part of the name (e.g. "Des Chouettes Lane", "Des Perdrix Crescent").
Danny M

This edit appears to have broken the 162 bus route relation.
The problem is that if you
1. download a way into JOSM without downloading any referring relations
2. split the way
Any referring relations will only contain one of the split ways, not both. For a route relation, this will create a gap.

This is a known bug in JOSM (see https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/4142). I only found out about it after breaking several relations myself (including the Canada relation).

By the way, this sidewalk tagging is great.

Google Streetview has photos with the Carol Todd name. I'd be interested in seeing what the city says about it.

@Matthew Darwin, the (post-amalgamation) street signs clearly indicate Carol Todd Drive, not Caroltodd Drive. There are uses of both names online. I'd be inclined to go with the on-the-ground name, not the city database name. The address points and the French name could be changed for consistency.

walter,
I didn't get any JOSM warnings (about broken boundaries). I think the problem was that I split a way without downloading all relations that that way belongs to. The new way created should be added to any unloaded relations, but JOSM doesn't do this, or even let you know there is any problem, even if you later download a broken relation. If you download a way, JOSM should also download all relations that the way belongs to.

I'm not going back and reviewing each individual deletion. Most of the nodes I deleted were duplicates, but the tags were usually OK. I didn't delete node/5158425038, just relocated it.

OK, I'll wait until things settle down.

Hi walter,
I accidentally broke Unorganized North Cochrane+Cochrane District when adding Greenstone. Thanks for catching this.
Danny

How did this edit undelete the duplicate Espanola?