Hi - please note that as per Seattle law (see RCW 46.61.235 and SMC 11.14.135) there exists a legally protected crosswalk at all intersections with curb ramps whether there are road markings present or not.

As such, these crossings (and the others in your recent similar changesets) are not informal crossings.

I also recommend avoiding use of the `crossing`=* tag entirely: instead, tag `crossing:markings`=* and `crossing:signals`=* as appropriate.

I've gone ahead and fixed these addresses (Changeset: 152306850)

Take a look at these pages on the wiki for more information on how addresses are stored in OSM:
osm.wiki/Addresses
addr:*=*

Happy mapping!

The business in question does occupy the entire building, which does not actually have multiple addresses.

A forum thread from six years ago in which there is no clear consensus and which is in conflict with the most recent tagging guidance on the wiki is not an authoritative source.

I've fixed this specific instance in Changeset: 152216484; please do not reduce more-detailed mapping of features as areas into nodes in the future.

Thanks for making the other good contributions in this changeset and closing their related notes - happy mapping.

Why have you deleted information from POIs mapped as buildings and blindly copied the tags onto new nodes? For example:
Node: Ace Hardware Maple Leaf (11952744012)

Hi! For some context on why those types of crossings are mapped in this area as unmarked and not informal: there exists at all intersections a legal pedestrian crossing whether there are any markings or signals present or not, according to Seattle law.

Happy mapping!

Hi!

Please consider separating future changesets into smaller geographic regions, as this makes it easier for future editors to understand and review these changes. For example, after making changes in Mexico, submit those additions before moving on to make edits in Canada.

Additionally, please refer to the wiki (osm.wiki/) if you are unsure of how to tag something, rather than using "tourism=attraction" as a generic tag for points of interest. For example, Node: Victoria Bike Rentals (11891775974) should be tagged with "amenity=bicycle_rental"

Happy mapping!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

I just wanted to reach out and say that it's great to have another active local mapper and that I especially appreciate your detailed changeset comments - keep up the great work!

Happy mapping!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

I see that you requested a review on this changeset - looks good to me for the most part, however I think you might have accidentally put a typo in the "opening_hours" tag.

"opening_hours=11:00-2ㄞ:00"
should probably be updated to
"opening_hours=Tu-Su 11:00-20:00"

Thanks for your contribution! Let me know if you have any questions, and happy mapping!

Thanks for patching these up, as well as for your other recent updates to the Maple Leaf area. Happy mapping!

Hello, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for your contributions via StreetComplete! Happy mapping :D

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Thanks for contributing the information that this shop is closed!

However, because there were also other tags on this node unrelated to the shop, like the address information, it's preferable to just remove the tags that no longer apply and not delete the node entirely.

I've "undeleted" it and updated its tags (Changeset: 150368720) so there's nothing you need to correct here - just keep the principle of "Keep the History" in mind in future edits!

Happy mapping!

Hi! Welcome to OpenStreetMap :D

Thanks for your contribution!

Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for your contribution - looking forward to see more in the future!

That solves it, then - I think I had used an Overpass filter to download a layer with only way["highway"] so it hadn't downloaded that relation. There's an option "File->Download Parent Ways/Relations" so I'll be sure to use that when making similar edits in the future. Thanks!

Hi! Thanks for catching and fixing my mistake!

So that I better understand how to avoid this error in the future, is it correct that I should have just kept the history on the left side of the split?

I'm used to JOSM just handling relation modification in the background during splits: for example, if a way is part of a route relation, JOSM automatically adds the newly-created way into that relation in the correct spot when the way is split, but I guess that doesn't apply to turn restrictions.

I'll keep an eye out for similar situations in the future. Thanks again!

Hi - thanks for catching this and fixing it! I'm not entirely sure how that tag ended up being created, but I definitely didn't intend for it to be there. Much appreciated!

Hi - thanks for your contribution!

OneBusAway no longer returns results for stops 25930 and 25060, so deleting these "highway=bus_stop" nodes is a good change.

Note that OSM also includes "public_transport=stop_position" nodes on the way which the bus travels (in this case, 35th Ave NE) as part of how bus stops are mapped - so I've gone ahead and deleted those nodes as well. (Changeset: 149634946)

I've recently been working on updating some of the transit infrastructure mapping in this area, and changes like yours make that process a lot less of a headache. Thank you, and happy mapping!

Hi! It looks like this is a good change, because the grass at this park is gone and it is now a construction area.

However, I've noticed that almost all of your changeset comments are just "aerial, knowledge, ,survey --". In the future, it would be very helpful and much appreciated to leave more descriptive changeset comments - for example, "Updated park to remove grass which is no longer present due to ongoing construction" or something similar!

Thanks for the feedback - I'll definitely include which imagery was used in future similar changesets' tags!

I was using the King County Orthoimagery as my "authoritative" alignment for a bit (and still use it very often, especially because the 2021 imagery was taken when many trees hadn't grown back their leaves) but received a message from another prolific Seattle-area mapper saying that it's better to use Bing as a reference and that is the local convention, so I've been following that since then.

In JOSM, I set the offset for the 2021 King King County Orthoimagery to "-1.7915,0.8959"

I also wanted to try recording some GPX tracks over time and figuring out a "perfect" alignment (but the hills make that impossible) however I only have my phone's GPS, which I can't really rely on for perfect accuracy.

Thank you for catching and fixing my spelling mistake! Much appreciated!