looking further into other edits made by this account it seems like this and many other changeset's produced by this account are vandalism. many of the roads and buildings added/edited by this account have alignments that aren't aligned to any available imagery (in iD) in the area. so either this contributor is adding buildings have been built within the last year (or possibly less) or this is vandalism. this is especially clear at Lake Mead were were edits made by this account in two different commits create geometry that I severely doubt the correctness of. If the Lake Mead edits are "correct" as in their not vandalism then they are extremely sloppy to the point were there is at least 1 multipolygon loop in the geometry that I saw.
This user has also added residential areas that have really odd shapes and residential roads that are in the middle of nowhere and do not connect to other roads that intersect with them. all of this compounds to making me think that most if not all of the edits by this user are vandalism.

I am just not 100% sure since most of the edits I saw from this account when looking through on OSMCha are in Las Vegas and Buenos Aires which are cities I know next to nothing about so I cant tell what's being built were. but still based on the edits them selves this account seems to be doing vandalism.

this seems to be vandalism to me, I don't know the area but I doubt that changes like this would happen; and if there is some truth to this the geometry is really sloppy so someone with local knowledge should give this a second look.

two notes here:
first next time can you please leave a better changeset comment, for more information see osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

second next time try to not have the bounding box of the changeset spanning multiple continents or even countries, try to keep them local.

next time please leave a changeset comment describing what you did in the commit, for more information see osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

A few points here:
first of all, the tag "bicycle=not specified" is not used anywhere else according to taginfo. this means that this is something you made up, there is no community consensus on this and thus probably shouldn't be used. there is also the fact that if there is not sign explicitly not allowing bikes on a way the assumed value is that it is the same as the normal access on the way. for Miami dade the defaults for public sidewalks is "access=yes".

the second issue is that you added access=permissive on way/1144585259 which is in the public facing part of the zoo so would in actuality be "access=customers;employees" because that way is only allowed for customers who payed to get in to the zoo and employees of the zoo.

Could you please respond
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155391150

Please stop removing tracks when they are visible from the latest imagery.

small question,

is the "Binker Classroom" just a hystorical classroom or is it a museum of sort, I ask because since I have never been there it seems to me like this may be better tagged on a way (or multipolygon if you please) as:
indoor=room
room=classroom
name=Binker Classroom
level=*

you obviously know the area better so feel free to ignore this if this doesn't apply or you don't feel like micro-mapping to that degree. I am pointing this out because it is generally frowned upon to have nodes with just names without something more descriptive in the tagging (describing what the node isn't used for).

happy mapping,
Udar

The building of Dadeland Station should include the parking garage because the parking garage is for Dadeland station and thus is part of it. That’s why I tagged it as building:part rather then splitting it.

Happy mapping,
Udar

Small note, to me way/1311400828 looks more like a bike path then a service road especially because were it meets way/1311400829 there seems to be tactile paving of some sort there. Just a small note

Happy mapping,
Udar.

you know you placed this inside of a post office. this means that this is almost certainly incorrectly placed.

also what is the source for this commit?

Happy mapping,
Udar.

residential landuse should be mapped as on large area like the way you deleted in this commit, this is because the whole area (including the roads) is residential, not just the part with the homes, the whole of it. land use is ultimately mostly decided by the county and the developers, we just map what they decided. OSM is a map of the world as it is, so we must endeavor to map the world as it is, this is why we shouldn't map landuse as individual small areas but as the whole area because what land is used for what is decided by the county in the zoning and use of the various areas and when mapping land use that is what we are mapping and the land that the roads are on is still part of the land that is being used as part of the neighborhood which is the larger area.

if you have any comments feel free to contact me seperatly.

happy mapping,
Udar.

good work

I rode this bus today (08/28/2024) from MDC building M to Southwest 88th Street & Southwest 77th Avenue bus stops so I can confirm that for this section this rout (104 eastbound) has this alignment. There may be other differences elsewhere on this route but I cannot be certain of that. I know that the routes changed last November but I don't know if the official gtfs files from Miami Dade county public transport can be used as a source for OSM edits.

Please respond

A few questions:

Why do some of the route names have “.gpx” in them? Does the actual name of the route contain “.gpx” in it or is that from were ever your getting these alignments from because if so you should probably check the names and remove such errors before uploading.

Second of all the naming in general seems of since these names are nothing like every other public transport version 2 route I’ve ever seen so the naming might need another pass and a few fixes.

Third all or of these are missing important fields like “from”, “to” and others and times when they are provided they are only partially there, for example from a cursory loo through I found a few that have “colour=#” with nothing else provided which seems odd since the actual color in use comes after hash symbol usually.

Some of the routes also have obvious holes in them.

Happy mapping,
Udar

What’s the source for this?
I ask because this does (based on the imagery) very much seem to be a bike path that allows bikes traveling on miller road to navigate the roundabout through the pedestrian crossings by entering the sidewalk network were this way meets the road. This is a common pattern you will see in other parts of Miami dade, were at roundabouts you will see bike paths like this going to the street and thus allowing bicyclists rinding on that road to transfer to the normal sidewalks so that they can cross the roundabout through the same crossing individuals walking will use since it is safer that way.
Also as previously mentioned unless there’s a sign saying that bikes aren’t allowed on this way bikes are allowed and there isn’t any signs showing that in this area (based on the bing imagery available in iD) so bike=no shouldn’t be on this way. Also if this truly isn’t a bike path then it should be a sidewalk.

bicycle=unknown Is discouraged from being used (aka an incorrect tag) on the osm wiki so it shouldn’t be used; you not knowing if bikes are allowed on a pedestrian path does not need to be tagged, unless there’s a sign saying that bikes aren’t allowed it is implied that you can. For more information see the “ Possible tagging mistakes” section on the following wiki page bicycle=* .

Why deleted these?

As mentioned previously I think it would be better to keep both in this situation, the tagging on the road and the area representing the area the street side parking actually takes up.

Happy mapping,
Udar