No worries. It's impossible to know all of the conventions that are used everywhere :) which is why I was asking whether you were following some other guidance elsewhere. I am open to changing it, but what's on the wiki was the best I could come up with at the time (so that it would be interpreted properly by the various map frontends).

Looking at changeset/145262125#map=19/49.27831/-122.85209&layers=N, none of the breweries open to the public get rendered anymore.

Hi, it looks like you've been changing the tagging of all of the Port Moody breweries away from the tagging guidelines I've been using for many years (osm.wiki/BC_Craft_Breweries). Any particular reasons? Have new guidelines been developed?

I fixed the phone number formatting in changeset/84112062.

I just moved this business away from the wall so that it renders better on the map: changeset/84111930

It is however still missing a business type. Do you know what kind of business it is? Without the correct type, it will typically not be rendered.

Best.
Francois

The phone number was missing the country code ("+1") and so I added it in changeset/84111749.

Hi Barb,
I noticed the use of the "addr:state" tag on this location. The correct one for Canada is "addr:province".

I've fixed it in changeset/84111653.

Best.
Francois

Hi Barb.
Thanks for adding extra details about this busines. It turns out that was already an entry for Sushi Maro on the map: node/4435421597. Perhaps you missed it when you added it to the wrong location?

In addition, I noticed two other things in your change:
- There were some unrelated and seemingly accidental changes to the SkyTrain entrance.
- The phone number was not in the correct format. The correct format for North America is +1-areacode-phonenumber.

I reverted your change and added all of the new information you provided to the existing point of interest: changeset/84111291

Best.
Francois

Hi Allison,

You may have missed it due to the zoom level or something like that, but Chopped Leaf was in fact already on the map: node/3843237663.

I removed the duplicate in changeset/83673432.

Francois

Can we use covered=yes instead of tunnel=yes when it's open on both sides?

The guidance on the wiki for these two tags is a little confusing.

I tried to fix these as best as I could in the following changesets:
changeset/82413207
changeset/82413253
changeset/82413301

Francois

Hi Nelly,
Thanks for adding a bunch of benches to OpenStreetMap!

I noticed a small mistake in the way that the benches are tagged and I thought I'd point it out to you so that you can keep that in mind for future ones.

It seems like the "ele" tag is used to describe the ground where the benches are anchored. That tag however is supposed to be in meters and refers to the elevation from sea level, typically only used for mountains: ele=*?uselang=en

I'm happy to go through your recent edits in a couple of days and fix that up. Since I don't know exactly what you are describing in the "ele" field, I will probably just remove the information, unless you want to fix it up yourself.

Again, thanks for contributing and I hope these comments will be useful in your future mapping.

Francois

Hi there,
Thanks for adding a bunch of benches to OpenStreetMap!

Looking at one of these benches (node/7286157677#map=19/49.28883/-123.13833), I noticed some minor problems:

1. The "ele" tag is used with the incorrect data type. It should be in meters (see ele=*?uselang=en), but it's in feet in node/7286157678 and it consists of a textural description in node/7286157677
2. In these same benches, the name field is used as a sort of description. That's not ideal because it might end up being displayed in some map renderings as if it were a very important element. The "note" field would be more appropriate in this case. See name=*?uselang=en for the cases where a name is necessary/appropriate (basically where there's a sign stating the object's name).
3. This bench (node/7286157678) uses the note field, which isn't wrong at all, to describe something that could just be entered in the "material" field (see material=*?uselang=en).

If you'd like to correct these yourself, I'm happy to let you do it. Otherwise, I can make a note of them and come back to it in a few days.

Again, thanks for your contribution and I hope that you won't mind my pointing out these small adjustments. I just wanted to make sure to send these comments quickly so that your future edits can be even better.

Best.
Francois

Hi Allison,
Is this place a regular event venue or is this a temporary event that's taking place in another business right now?
Francois

Nevermind, I do remember now. Here's a photo of it: https://www.flickr.com/photos/stephaniehobson/3783453579/in/album-72157619611224370/

It was a pretty small thing. Probably half a dozen to a dozen graves.

Sadly not. It's been so long that while I do remember visiting Inverness, I don't remember anything about that pet cemetery.

This was actually on the map and it looks like you found the existing entry in your second changeset: changeset/78167795

I've removed the duplicate entry in changeset/78178037.

There were several issues with the addition that was made to OpenStreetMap, please review the fixes I made here: changeset/77598981

The URL fields were not correctly formatted and the amenity type was also not set properly. I fixed it in changeset/77551285.

This was already on the map. I have merged the two nodes together in changeset/77551227.