Hi wegerje,

I noticed you're mapping individual trees with natural=wood- please tag single trees with a node tagged natural=tree instead of a natural=wood polygon. The presence of a single tree does not make a forest. I appreciate the granularity but natural=wood is for dense forest.

We're not trying to recreate aerial imagery here, please see osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Thanks, I don't go to the mall often so I didn't know. If you come across something like that, it's helpful to leave an untagged element with a note on it so that people don't re-add things that are still visible on aerial imagery.

Hi dufekin,

Please correct the typos in this changeset, multiple ways have been given the tag "access=prviate" which is misspelled.

This is also a reminder to respond to other outstanding changeset comments from other users, and to use more descriptive changeset comments as "Pennsylvania State University" does not describe the purpose of this changeset.

Hello dufekin,

Could you explain why you are tagging these areas as leisure=park?
relation/14067094
relation/14067093

Hello,

Not every way needs to be combined- especially when portions of the way belong to a relation. Split ways are okay in this case as the shuttle route path needs the way to be split to have the correct path. Generally if a way is split, there is a reason for it.

gotcha, noted for the future!

Hi, I have some questions about this changeset. Why did you add a park here? way/844694794

What are these floating bits of amenity=college? Where did you get the boundaries for them? way/844694807 way/844694806

What is this amenity=college? Operator? It doesn't look like a campus to me... way/844694809

I also don't think this should be a park, especially not the administrative offices. way/844694811

What is this park? Where did you see it? way/844694814

Fixed.

I'm not sure this is standard tagging for parking lots- while yes parking is used by pedestrians I believe highway=pedestrian should be used for only pedestrian-oriented areas. amenity=parking areas are built for cars, not pedestrians.

I believe most data consumers also already understand amenity=parking to implicitly allow pedestrians anyways.

Looked at some older imagery and found that this was indeed the case- last evidence for a filled pond was 2006, dry in 2007 and does not appear on any local imagery since

National parks are not tagged as leisure=park. Take a look at some of the other national parks in the US for examples of tagging

boundary=national_park

I know JOSM botched this one and only uploaded nodes, reverting ASAP

I feel like we need to have a community discussion for the tagging schema in Virginia before edit warring over this. The primary tagging schema in the US appears to be natural=wood rather than landuse=forest.

I've been mapping forest south around Roanoke/Lynchburg using natural=wood for forest that might technically be managed, but clearly not used for lumber. landuse=forest would be for visibly man-made sections of forest.

landuse=forest around the legal boundaries seems unnecessary- renderers already ignore the distinction between the two.

You're free to join the discussion in the OSMUS slack.

I'm aware this upload has an error. I'm fixing it ASAP.

I'm aware this upload has an error. I'm fixing it ASAP.

I'm aware this upload has an error. I'm fixing it ASAP.

I'm aware this upload has an error. I'm fixing it ASAP.

Thanks! VA has a slightly higher resolution landcover raster layer available than the national set so I've been using it as a guide (cross referencing with aerial of course)

The error has been fixed. changeset/113653075

Wolf Pitt Road references removed - Campbell County Gov has no listing for Wolf Pitt Road and as far as I can find on street level imagery there is no signposting for it