Fixed in changeset changeset/172039442

Thanks for catching my mistake again. Similar to last time, I searched for “cưỡi ngựa” and this was all that showed up. The translation for leisure=pitch sport=equestrian got renamed, so it was back to English again. I just updated the translation, so it should be back in the next release.

I fixed the mistagging in changeset/172038103.

Thank you for fixing it. 🙂

This seem more like service=parking_aisle than service=driveway.

This crossing and others along the busway have *three* different kinds of signals. If you remove crossing=traffic_signals, at least add crossing:signals=yes.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/do-we-really-need-railway-tram-crossing-resp-tram-level-crossing/118987/25

Thanks for adding official_name at least. The artificial names are unfortunate. Even with official_name, it’s implying that *normal* people call it “Bus 806 (Eastbound) Eagle Mountain - Saratoga Springs - Lehi Station - UVU”. Now that iD can generate similar descriptions automatically, we could get the website and JOSM to do something similar so that the real-world name can be tagged as a real-world name.

I cleaned up relation/9671226 to be have valid multipolygon geometry (without any touching outer rings) and joined way/298116730 to its outer way.

Hi, just to be clear, OSMUS the organization doesn’t have anything to do with this. It’s just a few of us local mappers discussing what to do about the fact that some parts of these preserves are open to the public while others are off-limits. Each of these preserves used to be mapped as two separate boundary=protected_area relations with disambiguators in the name, but mappers from abroad criticized this approach for making up names. The boundary=forest_compartment areas are the closest alternative that preserves information while retaining just one overall park boundary.

Ideally, yes, the compartments should be connected to the overall park boundaries at each node instead of having these duplicate nodes everywhere. I’ve already cleaned it up for a couple of other preserves, but it’s very tedious.

New Brunswick is legally bilingual and this is a big deal to its residents. If anything the name=* tag on the relation should be bilingual to match, based on the documented community consensus. [1] If you plan to give English more prominence than French, I suggest taking the matter up with the Canadian community. [2] Incidentally, I’ve proposed to delete the Canadian place=state points to properly acknowledge the provinces as provinces. [3] If this would affect Lyft as a data consumer, please say so on the forum. Thank you.

[1] osm.wiki/Multilingual_names#New_Brunswick
[2] https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/ca/95
[3] https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/acknowledging-provinces-in-website-search-results/127164

It’s a concession stand run by the Cincinnati Marlins inside Keating Natatorium. It was called the Bait Shop when I went to St. X back in the 2000s, but they might’ve renamed it since. A video of the natatorium’s recent remodeling shows a concession stand still there. [1] I restored the POI in changeset/170455842 but retagged it as a concession stand to avoid confusion.

[1] https://www.facebook.com/shp1901/videos/st-xavier-high-school-natatorium/1065818547585793/

I reverted this in changeset/170225644. I-280 continues all the way to the interchange with U.S. 101. The overhead sign you’re referring to is telling drivers to get into the right lane if they want to continue on to I-680. I’ve added a destination:ref tag to indicate that.

Whoa, neat to finally see all this detail in the area!

In the forum discussion, there wasn’t a consensus that a tower can only be represented as a single node and cannot be micromapped further. To restore information that was lost but avoid an edit war, I’ll subsequently retag this man_made=mast as man_made=communications_tower, which is documented as either a node or an area.

changeset/169700266

(This only affects the Vietnamese name.)

Hi, thanks for your interest in this park. This building is a picnic shelter, not a house. No one can live here. You can see in Bing Streetside imagery that there are no walls, only a roof over a concrete slab floor and a picnic table inside. In general, a building inside a park is unlikely to be a house, though there are exceptions. changeset/168747793 reclassifies this building.

Hi, changeset/168580613 removes these name tags. The route relation is already tagged network=US:OH and ref=11, which is sufficient for data consumers to format it as OH-11 if they really want. As far as addressing, the USPS recognizes a number of different formats for numbered highways [1], but “State Route #” is the canonical one per ODOT and county addressing systems.

[1] https://pe.usps.com/text/pub28/28apf.htm#ep79483

Hi, your addition of a ref tag to the Peña Boulevard route relation is apparently causing some renderers to think this route is numbered “Peña” despite already belonging to a route network all its own. You also cited an image on Wikimedia Commons that might be misleading people to think it’s a route shield:

https://github.com/osm-americana/openstreetmap-americana/pull/1214#issuecomment-3034717224

The rule of thumb is that OSM maps anything that still exists based on observation, while OHM maps anything regardless of when it existed (past, present, or future) based on research. This subway tunnel still exists, but the stations only exist as clues like platforms and setbacks in the walls. It’s perfectly normal for something to be represented in both projects, but it might be described differently in either.

The subway itself definitely belongs in OSM as railway=abandoned and ideally man_made=tunnel. The stations are iffier, but at least general-audience maps won’t mislead their users if you use abandoned:railway=station instead of railway=station.

There are actually two OpenRailwayMap sites these days. The one at https://www.openrailwaymap.org/ is no longer maintained and doesn’t support any tagging scheme for abandoned stations that I know of. The more modern one at https://openrailwaymap.app/ doesn’t show the Cincinnati Subway at all, because it gets its historic railways exclusively from OHM, which doesn’t have the subway yet but really should.

This subway is a bit of an oddball, since it was only ever under construction. In OHM, we’d probably end up mapping railway=construction from the 1900s to the 1920s, followed by railway=abandoned (plus man_made=tunnel). The station would similarly be construction:railway=station followed by abandoned:railway=station. If the newer ORM doesn’t show the stations with these tags, then we should be able to get the developers to fix that much sooner than with the older ORM.

Hi, I see that you attempted to keep OSM data consumers from misinterpreting the planned subway stations as active subway stations, but you need to use abandoned:railway=station or something like that. Otherwise, every data consumer currently thinks these are active subway stations, because they understand railway=station but not abandoned:railway=yes.

More generally, I think you’ll find that OSM is not a great home for information like this. We have a sister project, OpenHistoricalMap, that focuses more broadly on the past and present. It covers the Miami & Erie Canal [1] and Central Parkway but currently lacks the subway infrastructure, which would be more than welcome there. I dug up some references you could use for determining which parts of the proposed southern leg were built. [2]

In the meantime, would you mind at least retagging these stations or preferably deleting them, so they don’t mislead people looking for public transit directions? Thanks for understanding.

[1] https://www.openhistoricalmap.org/#map=17/39.107994/-84.515934&layers=O&date=1920-01-01&daterange=1788-01-01,2025-12-31
[2] https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/verifying-the-southern-leg-of-the-cincinnati-subway/115820