Quick question here, if this section of Forbes is being closed as well, why say in the changeset comment that it's the segment between Market Square and Wood Street being closed? That segment was already marked as closed and is being tracked via note #107333. ( note/107333 ) Just a little confused here.

Man, I can still remember when this was a course for drivers test.

Since you haven't responded in 7 days, I'm downgrading this road down to 'secondary'. This is in no way a 'trunk' here in PA. In PA, trunk roads are like US-22 between I-76/376 and I-99. This isn't like it or other true 'trunk' roads here in PA at all. This has been now changed in changeset/26965338. ( changeset/26965338 )

I'm sorry, but it is in no way a 'motorway' right now. It is indeed a 'tertiary' highway as it only connects to those types of road on each side do to it being a former 'canceled' highway (and if it ever had been finished, maybe it would have been a 'trunk' highway). So, I'm changed it back into a tertiary via changeset/26965240. ( changeset/26965240 )

Plus there's grass on each side there, clearly proving it's 'ground level' and not part of the bridge.

Where the concrete color changes, that's the true start of the bridge.

DUDE, the source you gave for your reversion PROVES my case completely.... http://triblive.com/neighborhoods/yourmckeesport/yourmckeesportmore/7153857-74/bridge-county-greensburg?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+alltribstories+%28TribLIVE+News%29#axzz3JTQs5O9t

Also, if you look at the wiki bridge page, this line stands out for this case. "A ramp at an end of a bridge is not part of the bridge and can be tagged as embankment=*. An embankment should not have a layer tag in most cases." bridge=*?uselang=en-US Thus, sorry, but no, I will not revert the revert. I'm betting others would agree with me here on how we do the bridge tagging.

We don't tag the approach ramps as part of the bridge. It's obvious from the MapBox imagery and the image from the Post Gazette article ( http://bit.ly/1tWDLWT ), that the physical start of the bridge is well from the main intersection with Airbrake Avenue. In OSM, we consider the bridge to start where there starts to be a gap between the ground and the bridge. No gap from the ground = no bridge tag. Thus, that way on that side needs to stay. Same goes for the '1st Street' side. It's clear from the MapBox imagery that PennDOT built a solid block concrete area there to create the new realigned intersection, and the bridge part starts where I have it set. 1st Street might need a little more of an alignment tweak still, but it's not part of the bridge, and thus, the bridge way shouldn't make it to the 1st Street intersection node. Thus, the end node for the bridge on that side is in the correct place. This image I just found on the Triblive site completely confirms what I have done. http://bit.ly/14Iw427

horst_w, he's referring to adding a 'source' tag on the changeset itself. Take a look at my changesets as an example of this type of 'source' tag.

Itchy, I'm sorry, but I'm going to revert this changeset. The way we tag bridges is where they start/end. This bridge per imagery (MapBox is the only one showing the new bridge under-construction), it clearly shows it ends before the intersections on each side, not at them. That's how I put it after you requested help in Note #270960 to make sure everything was set in a way to allow it to be routed on. If you want to change the name(s) of the ways on each side of the bridge after this revert, go ahead, I will not revert that. But the 'actual' bridge is in the correct place per current imagery. The revert has been done in changeset/26835715.

With relation/4171452, are you sure that's a 'no left turn' and not a 'no U-turn' restriction? Just doesn't seem to be correct to me.

I'm curious, but what is your basis for upgrading this to 'highway=trunk'. I just looked at the area, and to me, it looks like it could be upgraded maybe to secondary, but not all the way to trunk.

I'm sorry, but I do not agree with you on this. This seems to be a classic hamlet in OSM standards where you base stuff off of the population, and not 'official names'. I would recommend that you take a few moments to read about how we tag 'places' in here OSM. :) Will avoid any of these problems in the future. ;) place=*

Just so you know, we don't add County names to the ways like you did here. The names are part of the relations the way is a part of. I'll be reverting that part of this changeset. As you see here ( osm.org/#map=17/40.52337/-80.30074 ), the county names that are rendered are acquired from the Allegheny and Beaver County relations. Thus, I have deleted the name from the way in Changeset: 26703395. changeset/26703395

Ok, now that I looked more at the MapBox imagery showing the new C/D configuration here, I'm betting you were trying to add the 55 mph just for the C/D lanes. So, while adding the new C/D lanes in changeset/26686398, I kept the 55mph on the C/D lanes, but removed it from the actual ramps to Blanding Boulevard & Collins Road.

Hello mclaess. Are you sure that all of these ramps are really posted @ 55 MPH? To be honest, I highly doubt that FDOT would have done this because of how congested this interchange can become.

Alright, I have done this in changeset/26540556. Again, welcome to OSM, and if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask!
changeset/26540556

Welcome to OSM and thank you for your edits in the Boise, ID area.

However, I'm curious as to why you also added some items along the Equator in the middle of the ocean? Was that in error, and if so, can I be of assistance in reverting those particular edits?

Welcome to OSM and thank you for your edits in the