Globally, many more intersections are named (osm.wiki/Named_spots_instead_of_street_names ) than numbered in the real world (especially in Japan), so I’m not surprised about the disparity in the database. I had been under the impression that OSRM calls out junction refs at intersections, but junction names aren’t implemented yet (https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/issues/3500 ), so this might just apply to mistagging as junction:ref (which is for link roads).

Perhaps these should be redundantly tagged with ref for the time being, since that’s the more semantically correct key?

Should these numbers go in ref rather than name? I suspect most renderers and routers that understand junction names would also understand junction refs.

The discussion continues in https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/infrastructure-edits-in-usa-such-as-https-www-openstreetmap-org-changeset-137533993/100397

👌

These names were probably place names. Since it’s possible that these names came from a survey that’s difficult to reproduce, consider bringing back the names as place POIs. Otherwise, this changeset results in a loss of information.

Deleted in changeset/136957643; see note/2772893.

Asked in https://www.facebook.com/groups/openstreetmapvietnam/posts/1602562726821377/

Thanks for spotting these license=* tags. A more descriptive key is probably warranted, since ref:license=* isn’t used anywhere else, but we’ll have to consult with the local community on the exact key to use.

Technically, these numbers are the numbers of decisions by local governing bodies. “SYT-GPHĐ” stands for “Sở Y tế – giấy phép hoạt động” (Health Department – operating license), while “CT-CCHN” stands for “Cần Thơ – chứng chỉ hành nghề” (Can Tho province – practicing certificate). It’s typical for any decision/law/license number to contain a slash followed by a descriptor of this sort.

Not sure, but some OSM-based renderers do try to depict rooftop solar panels realistically:

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/streets-gl-a-new-3d-renderer-for-osm/98594/56

Hi, it’s correct to tag these solar panel structures as roofs (or more specifically, carports). Updated in changeset/136353699.

Hi, as you redraw roads to be dual carriageways, please remember to align the imagery layer you’re using with other features in the immediate vicinity of your edits. In this changeset, for example, the surrounding roads and other features had been aligned to a high-resolution imagery layer (OSIP 6in), so your edits based on Maxar imagery created a rather significant kink in the road that could have affected routing.

In iD, open the Background panel and scroll to the bottom, where you can adjust the Maxar layer’s offset. For best results, find a point feature that you can see in both the older, high-resolution imagery and the newer, low-resolution imagery (such as trees or crosswalks) and make sure that feature aligns with both layers.

Thanks for your attention to detail as you update these roads.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rainy-lake-super-relation/97627

Sorry for implicating you in this multipolygon mess. Indeed, the split multipolygons originated even earlier, in changeset/56736435 by a different mapper. We’ll continue to discuss this as a community, but you’re welcome to participate in the discussion if you prefer the current approach.

Continuing the discussion from https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/9565 , access=official is officially deprecated, and the value “official” actually meant the same as “designated”. In other words, you’re saying the service roads are designed to be used by all traffic (except air traffic). changeset/134243656 retags them as access=private private=maintenance, as they aren’t even for airport employees. Lyft editors have previously tagged similar nearby access roads as access=no, which is another option.

FYI, the local community has been discussing this issue on OSMUS Slack: https://osmus.slack.com/archives/CCV2P9QET/p1679802276162459 https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1679826643887899 (You’re welcome to join the workspace by visiting: https://slack.openstreetmap.us/ )

The lake is very complex in reality; I would think OSM should reflect that fact to the extent possible. It seems like you’ve identified a gap in the tagging model. Splitting up this lake is at best a workaround. After all, not every editor or data consumer would be impacted by the issue you mentioned.

The tagging was discussed on OSMUS Slack: https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1677722616750459

Even though this isn’t a vet facility that would accept walk-ins, it is a veterinarian who makes house calls.

Yes, I corrected the buildings in changeset/132948807. I used the same imagery as you but interpreted it differently. It’s important to understand how oblique or offset imagery can distort the shapes you see, especially with a pitched or gabled roof.

In this case, try comparing Esri and Maxar imagery to see how the rooflines differ – that’s the effect of photographing the building from a different angle in the sky.

Yep, I’ve got thousands of these buildings in the area that I’m slowly going back and cleaning up – not just squaring but in many cases complely redrawing, because I often mistook one building for two.

There’s also the osm.wiki/Hamilton_County_Building_Import which went on hiatus for years after the first phase was complete. I’ve started on the second phase, replacing geometries with the better geometries that come with heights and addresses. I’ve done the northern reaches of the county and plan to work southward over time. However, I can only bear to use JOSM so much at a time. If you’re interested in helping, I can send you a shapefile or set up a tasking manager project.

Hi, this changeset unfortunately had several major issues. I tried to manually repair most of the tagging problems in changesets 133062695 and 133064894. However, some things may need your attention:

* I restored all the road names you deleted. However, I was unsure about Johnnie Doolittle/Johnny Doolittle/Townsend-Ballard. Note that OSM doesn’t abbreviate words in names.
* I removed the network=* tags you added to roadways. network=* tags belong on route relations. I created route relations for all the numbered parish roads. If a parish road has a number but it isn’t posted anywhere, the ref=* tag should be replaced by unsigned_ref=*.
* I removed tags from nodes such as node/116032755 that were were tagged as roads. Perhaps you misclicked?
* I undid every instance of highway=road, which is essentially never supposed to occur. However, I wasn’t very thorough in reclassifying residential roads as tertiary roads etc.
* I undid every instance of highway=path, which is for non-vehicular usage. Most were highway=track, but some were driveways (highway=service service=driveway).

My guess is that most of these problems arose when you accidentally edited the tags on a large selection or a find-and-replace operation. We’ve all been there. In case you haven’t tried it, I highly recommend using the iD editor, which has a less confusing interface. iD labels everything with everyday words instead of the jargon in JOSM that may have misled you into using these tags incorrectly. It’s just harder to make a mess. I myself use iD and only use JOSM in extreme circumstances.

Regardless of the editor you prefer, you can find help by joining the U.S. community’s Slack chat server at https://slack.openstreetmap.us/ . There’s a #local-louisiana room there with a bunch of locals and expats who know how to say bayou. ;-)