Hello,
Why did you split highways at intersections? If the ways have the exact same tags and belong to the exact same relations, splitting it is pointless.

Wikipedia lists the Sierra Nevada mountain range as one of the boundaries of the Mojave Desert. Having a feature (or a set of features) representing it could make displaying that fact a lot easier.

Hello, why did you add duplicate buildings to the map? That was completely pointless.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168213096

That was completely unintentional. JOSM's edit conflict resolver is usually something I want to avoid because I might need to sync all the data in my active layer, which might not even work. Also, I was mainly adding NHS and "is_in:state" tags to major cross-country highways, so I don't think I could've made the changeset smaller.

This is Old 𝗨𝗦 Highway 91, not Old Utah State Route 91, so of course the number "91" won't appear inside a beehive shape. On the contrary, it also does not appear in a brown rectangle like Historic Route 66 does. I actually made a fork of AmericanaMap.org that colors "𝚄𝚂:𝚄𝚂:𝙾𝚕𝚍" Highways as green (consistency with sign blades). Again, "Old Highway 91" could refer to any old highway, so keeping that in 𝚗𝚊𝚖𝚎=* while not at least giving it 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝚛𝚎𝚏 tag could lead to ambiguity.

So, according to this very database, these highways are tagged with "name=Old Highway 91." I've mentioned this multiple times before, but "Old Highway 91" sounds like something better suited for a ref tag, instead of a name tag. These highways were once part of U.S. Route 91, and there are many human-readable variations of that, such as "Old Highway 91," "Old US 91," "Old Route 91," and even "Old US Highway 91." All these human-induced tags can be simplified into a tag like `ref=US 91 Old` ("Old" is not quite the same as "Hist," like "US 66 Hist"). I would sort of count these as official designations, since they are signed as Old Highway 91.

Okay, that's fair enough. Interestingly, proposed highways 𝘥𝘰 get rendered on the German Carto style. Out of the highway=proposed ways in the Valley, which ones are likely to be built in the near(est) future? I could load an Overpass Turbo query for all the proposed highways in the Valley and delete them.

Hello, why did you relabel some taxiways as Yellow and/or Green? I couldn't find any source for that on the ground.

Hello, why did you change these named roads to service roads? Generally speaking, service roads are unnamed access roads to properties. Palazzo Drive is signed and wider than a parking aisle or driveway, so it should be an unclassified road.

There was an already-existing highway=proposed alignment of Sheep Mountain Pkwy that, for the most part, seems to parallel the alignment I found in the "Kyle Canyon Map" PDF. I mean, to be fair, parts of that original alignment that you added have been built (mostly along Shaumber Road), so I guess that part can remain. Would it be helpful, perhaps, revert this specific edit and, if the expressway/freeway plans ever come to fruition, revert that revert?

I didn't make any changes to the US relation. That was done by someone else; I tried to revert it, but the changeset was too big. The common name for the country that I live in is "United States" (and was like that for a while until some user changed it to "United States of America"), while the official name is "United States of America."

You say that Shoal Creek Drive is the first at-grade intersection of CA 56? Highway=trunk has nothing to do with that whatsoever. That can be indicated with either the combination expressway=yes and access_control=full or highway=motorway.

Shoal Creek Drive is a random residential street, not a trunk road or motorway. Why that one in particular? Also, roads in OSM are (for the most part) classified based on their importance in the road network.

Hello, why did you re-upgrade this portion of Ted Williams Pkwy to trunk? It doesn't connect to any other trunk roads east of I-15.

How were you able to edit it when I can't? It's not like there's anything I can do to edit it again since this one relation is so big.

I didn't get a chance to add a description, so I'll do it now: I added "Home Depot" as the operator.

Hello, what was the point of that? Having a node and a building represent the same thing makes the map look cluttered; it also violates the "one element, one feature" rule.

No, this was not an automated edit at all. I made sure to check the highways before publishing them, since some values of road=* were typos (e.g., road=unclasified). Also, the fact that a road is unpaved doesn't inherently mean it can't be a secondary road (I just read the article for track roads on the wiki). Any locals who know the classification of these highways are free at any time to correct the classification. I changed most of them to highway=road because I could not determine their classification by looking at their tags (i.e., road=rural road). Also, marking them with highway=road alerts QA tools to (hopefully) alert users about what happened.

There were ~400 objects (IIRC), so I really only checked one (a random junction in California).

Thanks for adding names to these roads! They've been missing for a long time.