Hello,
Thank you for reviewing my edit, making the required corrections and providing me the necessary feedback. Upon deep dive, as rightly mentioned by you I have extended the minor unclassified and missed out on modifying the existing access restrictions which were not true to ground reality.
I will ensure to perform the necessary checks before uploading edits on OSM to avoid incorrect tagging mistakes.
Regards,
Deepika

Hello,
Thank you for providing feedback on our edits and suggesting the corrections to made based on the country rules.
We acknowledge that this is an editor miss. The editor overlooked the region and location details before making the edits in imperial units. Based on your feedback, he has made the necessary changes in the changeset/153765970.
We have provided the editor with feedback to perform necessary checks to verify the location and the metrics to be used while making the edits based on the country rules.
Regards,
Deepikja

Hello Teresa,
The address for driveways that have been digitized in the changeset/109844454 is mentioned as Mackenzie Lane, Fayette County, Georgia, 30214, United states.
Request you to please share the location coordinates of the address you would like us to update as Fayetteville.
Regards,
Deepikja

Hello,

Thank you for providing feedback on our edits and making the necessary corrections. Apologies for the delay in responding to your comment; we were unable to retrieve the feedback shared by the community users owing to a technical issue.
We acknowledge that this is an editor error. Based on ground reality, the correct mapping would be to tag the node #1032885242 with highway=mini_roundabout and junction=roundabout for way # 261284234.
We have trained the editors on the SOP to adhere to when contributing to OSM and provided them with feedback on wrong edits to avoid them from making incomplete edits in the future.

Regards,
Deepikja

Hello,
Thank you for your comments. I have made the corrections to the tagging from op* to operator on the way ID 436455336 in the changeset # 151101814. We have provided feedback to the team to verify the syntax errors before uploading the edits on OSM.
Regards,
Deepika

Hello,

Thank you for reaching out to us and I apologize for failing to respond to your inquiry due a technical glitch.

According to the Open Street Map (OSM) "The operator tag is used to name a company, corporation, person or any other entity who is directly in charge of the current operation of a map object."

The editor added the tagging operator = Mt. San Jacinto College based on the website https://www.msjc.edu/locations/documents/SJCcampusMap.pdf, which states that the vicinity is managed by San Jacinto Campus. He also referred to the existing edits on the map as a reference to conclude the addition of the tag, which were made by a local community user in the changeset #52026627.

Please let us know if you want us to remove this tagging if it does not provide accurate information, or feel free to suggest an alternative tagging that would be better suited in instances like these, allowing us to make the appropriate contributions in our future edits.

Regards,
Deepikja

Hello,
Thank you for writing us. To describe the edit, the editor included the changeset comment using the existing information on the outbound connecting roads. Also, currently the team is prioritizing the use of road names available on street sign boards over tiger data.
We will follow your recommendation and add comments with the most accurate information available on OSM. We are always happy to learn from the community.
Regards,
Deepikja

Hi,
Thank you for reviewing the edit and notifying us about the improper modifications. These changes were done by the editors in accordance with our internal SOP. We apologize for the incorrect edits flown into OSM from our end. I have restored the previous existing edits supporting the ground reality in the changeset ID # 143878001.
We will re-examine all of the changesets in which the team has updated traffic signal/stop sign attributes, and rectify them by 11/16. We will also work on updating the SOP to be followed while adding these attributes on public OSM which align with the community guidelines/OSM wiki.
Regards,
Deepika

Hi,
Thank you for reviewing the edit and notifying us about the improper modifications. These changes were done by the editors in accordance with our internal SOP. We apologize for the incorrect edits flown into OSM from our end. I have restored the previous existing edits supporting the ground reality in the changeset ID # 143877859.
We will re-examine all of the changesets in which the team has updated traffic signal/stop sign attributes, and rectify them by 11/16. We will also work on updating the SOP to be followed while adding these attributes on public OSM which align with the community guidelines/OSM wiki.
Regards,
Deepika

Hello,
Thank you for reviewing the edit and sharing your valuable suggestions. We sincerely apologize for the improper modifications that were by our editor. I did the necessary checks and identified that the editor needed to change the lane count on the northbound lane in addition to adding the link road.
We see you reverted the edit; please let me know if you want us to make the correct edit supporting the ground reality, and we will incorporate the learnings from your suggestions into our editing guidelines to ensure that the team does not make any more incorrect/incomplete road additions.
Regards,
Deepika

Hi,
Thank you for reviewing the edit and notifying us about the improper modifications. These changes were done by the editors in accordance with our internal SOP. We apologize for the incorrect edits flown into OSM from our end. I have investigated the edits and made the appropriate changes in the changeset ID # 143877119.
We will re-examine all of the changesets in which the team has updated traffic signal/stop sign attributes, and rectify them by 11/16. We will also work on updating the SOP to be followed while adding these attributes on public OSM which align with the community guidelines/OSM wiki.
Regards,
Deepika

Hi,
Thank you for reviewing the edit and notifying us about the improper modifications. These changes were done by the editors in accordance with our internal SOP. We apologize for the incorrect edits flown into OSM from our end. I have investigated the edits and made the appropriate changes in the changeset ID # 143876984.
We will re-examine all of the changesets in which the team has updated traffic signal/stop sign attributes, and rectify them by 11/16. We will also work on updating the SOP to be followed while adding these attributes on public OSM which align with the community guidelines/OSM wiki.
Regards,
Deepika

Hi,
Thank you for reviewing the edit and notifying us about the improper modifications. These changes were done by the editors in accordance with our internal SOP. We apologize for the incorrect edits flown into OSM from our end. I have investigated the edits and made the appropriate changes in the changeset ID #143875130.
We will re-examine all of the changesets in which the team has updated traffic signal/stop sign attributes, and rectify them by 11/16. We will also work on updating the SOP to be followed while adding these attributes on public OSM which align with the community guidelines/OSM wiki.
Regards,
Deepika

Hi,
Thank you reviewing the changeset and sharing the feedback with us.
We will make sure to give the editor the necessary feedback to avoid creation of duplicates and make the necessary connections/additions to- make sure that the newly segments added by us are overlapping with the existing data such as sidewalks/roads etc.,
Regards,
Deepika

Hello,

Thank you for reviewing the changeset and highlighting the issue. Apologies for the delay in the response to your comment as the editor is on leave.
In this changeset the editor has added the barrier based on the Bing street side overlay https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=40.691527%7E-73.969507&lvl=17.0&v=2&sV=1&mo=om.1&pi=-16&style=x&dir=79.9. However, the editor missed on checking the vintage. Apologies for the incorrect edit due to the incomplete check done by the editor.
I have reverted the edit in the changeset #136817619 based on the latest aerial imagery and will take this as a learning to be cautious and provide feedback to the editor to use the latest resources while making any editing on OSM.

Regards,
Deepikja

Hi Skyper,
We apologize for the incomplete change set comment provided by the editor in this particular change set. We have provided the editor with feedback and coached them to follow the change set commenting etiquettes.
According to OSM wiki the tag highway=track is used for minor land-access roads mostly used for agriculture, forestry etc., highway=track.
The tagging highway=path indicates a generic path that is used by pedestrians, small vehicles like bicycles, and/or animals.
The editor deleted the segment based on the latest imagery the path is largely vegetated and do not serve a physical entity. However, going forward we will be mindful while making such modifications and refrain from deleting existing segments unless we have ground evidence such as latest aerial imagery and overlays supporting the edit.
Regards,
Deepikja

Hello Skyper,

Thank you for making the edits. We are working on collating such change sets with complex edits to be used as reference for the editors and train them on JOSM usage which will help us make the correct adjustments in edit we make on OSM for dual carriage ways.
We will ensure that these learnings are used to make necessary corrections in our future edits.
Regards,
Deepikja

Hi Skyper,

Thank you for sharing your insights. The suggestions provided by you definitely has helped us understand the tagging.
We will work on documenting these change sets as examples for our editors which would help them to make a complete edit on OSM without tampering the existing tags/attributes.
Regards,
Deepikja

Hello Skyper,
We reverted the change sets created by the editor as we did not we do not have latest resource to confirm if the U-turns are allowed at the end of dual carriage ways.
Thank you for making the changes we will incorporate these as learnings in our internal wiki. Appreciate your support.
Regards.
Deepikja

Hello Skyper,
We reverted the change sets created by the editor as we did not we do not have latest resource to confirm if the U-turns are allowed at the end of dual carriage ways.
Thank you for making the changes we will incorporate these as learnings in our internal wiki. Appreciate your support.
Regards.
Deepikja