Hello and thanks for updating the map!

Can you provide some context about why you changed these road types? Being 'unclassified' is technically valid and does not mean it needs to be classified. I took a quick look: Most of the changes here look good, but I do not agree with some of them, particularly around Stanley Park and the Port.

It may have been better to submit your changes in pieces instead of city-wide. It makes it difficult to review the changes with such a dense changeset.

Thanks,
Joel

Thanks for the explanation, this makes sense.

I think I was trying to separate the scrub ground cover by creating way/1209175050 from the existing 102355693. I probably just split at the nodes (8412872122 and 366497349) and iD split all the ways and relations and not just the scrub I was working on.

I recombined the ways in changeset/102355693.

Does it make a difference how many ways are used to create an area? I have never paid attention to this part of the data model.

Thanks, Joel

Thanks for these additions! Please keep it up, if you can. I appreciate the new business listings.

This is great context, I didn't realize this is how the Mapathons worked. Thank you for your thoroughness.

That's awesome, I didn't know you had such resources available to you. This is great. I appreciate your work updating this.

Thanks,
joel56dt

Hello,

Please square the buildings after you draw them. You can do this in the iD editor by selecting the shape and pressing 'Q'. Right now the buildings are weird shapes because they have not been squared.

Thanks,
joel56dt

Hello,

You dragged the cul-de-sac to the wrong location. Please be careful when editing.

Thanks,
joel56dt

Hello,

I think you made a mistake here - there are two traces on top of each other.

Was this checked recently? The road was completely closed early in April.

Thanks, joel56dt

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for these updates!

Hi Enderbyte99,
Adding such a large polygon is difficult to edit and is incorrect since it covers many areas that are not scrub. Is there a reason you added a single large polygon and not individual areas that a specifically scrub?

Thanks,
joel56dt

Thanks

I meant to add: looks like it was correctly labelled because there are bike sharrows painted on the ground.

Hi krmatthews,

Can you help me understand what was incorrectly labelled? For example, way/883924313 looks like it is was correctly labelled as a shared lane.

Thanks,
joel56dt

Hello, it looks like you changed the address but did not change the location of this node. You can either move this node to the correct location or delete this one and create another at the correct location.

Thanks,
Joel

Need to check my eyes. Just going to change the lane counts and restriction tags

Oh I am incorrect. I will revert this...

Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Let me know if you have any questions about mapping in Vancouver or OSM overall.

- Joel

Hi Zarr,

Thanks for your changes here and all your other regular contributions.

I have noticed that we map "combined curbs" a bit differently (for example nodes 8177740855 vs 8177740857). I am not convinced my method of adding two curbs to each corner is best and I don't want to add incorrect/misleading data to the map. The wiki is not clear and I am wondering if your method is adequate. Is it appropriate to have > 2 ways connected to a single curb node?
(I am aware that you also map two curbs in instances where they are clearly separate, such as node/5765177201)

Or, could we both improve how we map combined curbs? Would mapping them like node/11608418585 make more sense? If someone is crossing both roads they may not strictly need to step on to the first curb before starting their second crossing. In a situation where the 'intermediary' curb is raised but the other two are lowered, the data could be misleading. Routing for low-mobility users would interpret that the raised curb must be stepped on when in reality it could be bypassed. (I am probably over thinking all of this but curbs are one of the most tedious things I have decided to map so I definitely do not want to be spreading bad data.)

Thanks!
Joel