Oh yes, jared is another VT based mapper I've chatted with on Slack. They've been adding addresses and buildings all over the state with the RapiD editor (an iD fork with access to external data sets).

@jared
osm.wiki/RapiD

I was worried there was some larger automated editing going on that I should be aware of. From what I've seen these changes seem to be in small batches and getting verified against aerial imagery. Obviously that can be out of date though, and I'm sure your on the ground knowledge of the area is better!

Thanks, for the reply. Always good to make contact with another VT mapper.

Hi A Hall,
Thanks for your work improving the map in Vermont. I saw your changeset comment and was just wondering what the incorrect automated edits you noticed where. Looks like this changeset mostly deleted some address nodes and copied the tags over to a nodes on the corresponding building outlines. Also if ever need to get in touch with other Vermont mappers join us in the #local-vermont channel on the OSM US Slack https://slack.openstreetmap.us/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107268939

Thanks! Glad you like them. My office is on church street so I've been walking around and surveying a bit on my lunch break. I've been learning the history of some of these buildings too from this UVM project: http://www.uvm.edu/~hp206/2018/

Looks right to me, Stan, although I was under the impression most OSM based routers assumed bicycle=no on highway=trunk roads unless otherwise tagged. Sounds like that wasn't your experience though. What routing service were you using?

Did you notice that this island is no longer visible due to changing natural=coastline to natural=coastline;glacier? I suggest mapping the glacier as a separate object from the coastline

RunTrails and WambacherWest, I've raised this issue on the OSM US Slack and the Talk-us mailing list if you care to join.
https://slack.openstreetmap.us/
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2021-April/020969.html

It's important to understand that the OSM tag "boundary=national_park" does not have the same meaning as "National Park" defined by the US National Park Service. They often overlap, but not always.

Looks good. Since it looks like the road is mostly blocked off I went ahead an disconnected the streets. I does look there is enough room for bicycles though so I added a little cycleway connection. Feel free to adjust if you have better information! changeset/102760709
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102577668

👍 I support this change. So there's a VT consensus of at least two.

The thing with OpenStreetMap is that the data can be rendered into many different ways. The transit layer focuses on public transit, not paths or roads so it shows them as simple gray lines without differentiation. Other layers like CycleOSM or Cycle Map show different types of paths differently.

Also, jmoran314, there are limits on mapping private information. See: osm.wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information
A toilet in a private resident is not appropriate for inclusion in OSM and would be removed.

Looks pretty good to me, Alaina. I saw the fixme note about how all the features of the Blue Hill trail ought to be connected but you didn't know how to do that. I checked for disconnected ways and didn't find any so I don't think there is a problem with it. Maybe I'm not quite understanding though. I also saw you were wondering how to separate a road into two sections, but it look to me like you had figured that out.

I think the access tags may still need some adjustment but that's ok. You're dealing with a complicated situation here! I'll send you a separate message with some more information about more complex accessing tagging.

Also if you want to join the OSM US slack, it's a great place to ask questions. You'll find discussions about this kind of stuff in the #trails channel. https://slack.openstreetmap.us/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100378135

Nothing wrong with leaving the name field blank if a road has no name. Are any motor vehicles ever allowed on these service roads? Authorized vehicles only perhaps? Sounds like these roads might not be plowed in winter? In that case winter_service=no would make sense too winter_service=*

Thanks for improving the Smuggs trail network! Looks like you could bump the 'piste:difficulty' up to 'freeride', the next level beyond expert.
piste:difficulty=*
That would be better than having the diamonds in the name. You can see how that ends up looking a little weird on OpenSnowMap for example.
http://www.opensnowmap.org/?zoom=17&lat=44.56481&lon=-72.76233&layers=snowbase&marker=false

I haven't skied this particular run, but it looks like it's tree skiing so adding 'gladed=yes' would be good too.
osm.wiki/Piste_Maps#Other_features

Feel free to join other mappers in the region on the OSM slack. Great place to ask questions. https://slack.openstreetmap.us/

Seems like this should get put back. Looks like a rugby pitch and parking to me. Still under construction in Bing imagery.

Apologies! I assumed changing it to a gas pipeline was a mistake since the changeset comments didn't say anything about pipelines and it doesn't connect to a greater pipeline network.

If the trail doesn't physically exist anymore you can just delete the way (unless you feel that documenting the pipeline is important). If the trail is still there but only for use by the property owners you can tag it with "access=private". That means the general public is not allowed.

Feel free to join the OpenStreetMap slack https://slack.openstreetmap.us/. Lots of friendly folks there available to answer questions.

AllTrails is generally very bad about updating their data, unfortunately. You may have to contact them directly.

It looks like you've already changed the way in question from a footway to an underground gas pipeline which doesn't make much sense: way/641239652/history

Thanks for updating the preserve boundary! Has WVPD actually changed the name to "Derway Island Nature Preserve and Derway Cove" though? Their website still has it named "Derway Island Nature Preserve".

The presence of a driveway and buildings here is a matter of public record and it is not an invasion of privacy to record these facts. Your privacy is respected by the access=private tag on the driveway.

Thanks for making this change. I read about the purchase when I added the Derway Island Nature Preserve a couple months ago but wasn't sure about the status of things since I haven't been there on the ground. Would it be appropriate to extend protected_area boundary to include this new parcel as well?
way/886584980