The wiki is correct, except other places in length are set and marked with units after. And the supporting document is in feet not meters. I refuse to convert and get inaccurate data. If JOSM or another program wants to translate please go right ahead.

FSR 6022 (Heybrook Lookout Road)

Hey Greg what do you mean: This is no longer a USFS-administered road!
Acording to this press brefieing it still has a Forest Service Road number of 6022

As suggested in the OSM slack to use nodes as height restrictions in most recent change set.

Several Problems here. Differing heights for different parts of the span. Different width for open vs closed. No height restriction when open.

I think you might be confusing attributes.
See discussion. https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1660384595469759?thread_ts=1660384595.469759&cid=C2VJAJCS0
I will be fixing this as suggested in the near future.

need to consider adding this to OHM.

Hello, After reviewing this change I will be deleting it for duplicated data.

@theMETAVERSr "Since when does a on the ground eye witness needed to verify business." This is actually the hole point to Open Street Map you might be thinking of Google Maps, where fraudulent POI's are common.
The key to Open Street Map is that the data collected needs to be something that can be collected by visiting the place. If the data can not be collected this way it enters a gray area where data can be removed. I have railroad data that gets removed as it is in this gray area, for a lot of people.
If you can not verify that the location exists; then it may be removed for the time being until it can be confirmed.

Looks Good. Also consider looking at GPS traces or Street Imagery for road location and shifting the aerial imagery.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120151764

Hello, Suggest in future a comment on the change set rather than a fixme edit.
Regards, Nat

thanks for the comment on my edit. Please be carful about making negative comments about how people are.

is that a personal attack? I was tired and hit paste thinking it was the last thing I wrote for save but instead was the that. I hit save before I noticed.

I have request others to look at this for some mediation.

Again please add that detail of the opening date and the continued construction to the attributes of the relation related to the Sound Transit rail line.

The user of the map need to know to expect rail traffic from any direction at any time on active rail and that is more important for safety than the interpretation of the map for passenger use.

Vehicles can now move freely along the corridor. The construction has ended to the point that allows traffic to move. There for the corridor is passible by rail traffic. Even if the use of the light rail vehicles has not changed to allow passengers.

I disagree https://www.instagram.com/p/CZu8k5-lGHp/
It is passible.

The line feature is a description of what we see on the ground. That is the way I enforce this. If you have a problem with this please bring it up within the community. I encourage you to do so as I think the life cycle tagging needs some support.

We are not arguing over the official definition. We are arguing over how it is defined to be mapped by OSM. railway=rail
As OSM maps what is on the ground. Not an official measure from a governmental source. I would encourage you to edit the relation as that is the place to make those marks.