I'm curious, but why are you adding 'FUT I-99' tags to the ref tags along these ways?

There are no 'Future' shields for I-99 posted, and I highly doubt PennDOT will be added any soon. The future route of I-99 may be defined, and in some rare places have an occasional 'I-99 Future Corridor' sign, however, that doesn't qualify it to be added into the ref tags yet since it isn't posted.

I'm curious, but why are you adding 'FUT I-99' tags to the ref tags along these ways?

There are no 'Future' shields for I-99 posted, and I highly doubt PennDOT will be added any soon. The future route of I-99 may be defined, and in some rare places have an occasional 'I-99 Future Corridor' sign, however, that doesn't qualify it to be added into the ref tags yet since it isn't posted.

This changeset has been reverted in changeset/34569484.
changeset/34569484

This changeset has been reverted in changeset/34569484.
changeset/34569484

I'm curious, but why are you adding 'FUT I-99' tags to the ref tags along these ways?

There are no 'Future' shields for I-99 posted, and I highly doubt PennDOT will be added any soon. The future route of I-99 may be defined, and in some rare places have an occasional 'I-99 Future Corridor' sign, however, that doesn't qualify it to be added into the ref tags yet since it isn't posted.

I'm curious, but why are you adding 'FUT I-99' tags to the ref tags along these ways?

There are no 'Future' shields for I-99 posted, and I highly doubt PennDOT will be added any soon. The future route of I-99 may be defined, and in some rare places have an occasional 'I-99 Future Corridor' sign, however, that doesn't qualify it to be added into the ref tags yet since it isn't posted.

He's now doing this on I-90 and I-87 in NY/MA. :( See his latest changesets.

Can you please provide your source for some of these road name changes?

This is obviously a one-way, not an 'impossible' one. The person just forget to add a way 'inside' of the car wash to continue routing. Thus, you're deleting perfectly valid data here.

See comments about this here: changeset/34237498

Well, I waited over 6 days for a response back from Matt1993, got nothing here. Had to act on the surgical revert before too many conflicts arose making it hard to do. Meanwhile he's still been editing in OSM during the time between the comments left here, so he's had time to leave a comment here...... Surgical revert has been done in changeset/34358905. changeset/34358905

That part of this changeset has been undone in changeset/34295451. changeset/34295451

I just noticed in this changeset that you added 'ref' tags for I-99 between Musser Lane & I-80 along US-220/PA-26 (one example: way/11833467 Version #12). Have you been to this area before? There are several 'TO' tabs above any I-99 shields in this area from the WB I-80 off ramp to Musser Lane. Plus there is a clear END shield for I-99 going NB @ Musser Lane (I have a personal picture of it). That's also where the first SB shield is located. Can you explain why you added it on a segment that isn't part of I-99?

Would it be possible to try to limit these types of changesets to just a single country?

maggot27, can you please try to make 'smaller' changeset areas? Ones that span the ocean always trigger in my RSS feed of my local area, even if there is nothing changed there.

Anyways, in closing, I would recommend a surgical revert here. Leaving the good stuff, like a few alignment fixes you did and layer fixes, but undoing the motorway upgrades and other stuff I mentioned above. Please get back to me on this. I'm more that willing to do the revert process, but I would love a response back first just to know we're on the same page before doing it.

Also, what's up with the downgrading of some of the highways in this changeset (like Arlington Ave from primary to secondary between PA-837 and the Liberty Bridge)? That is a major highway connection there for traffic, and justifies the primary tag between those two roads.

Also, what's up with the traffic lights you added here? changeset/34237498#map=19/40.51800/-80.13079 There have never been lights there (as long as I've been alive). That's all stop sign controlled. I would understand a mistake here if there were shadows from what looked to be lights overtop of the highway, but there isn't such shadows in Bing.

Also, please stop adding the PennDOT quadrant routes into the ref tags ( way/11733339 ). The US community agreed that they shouldn't be in the ref tag and should be added to 'ref:penndot=SR ****' instead. osm.wiki/Pennsylvania/State_Route_Relations#Four_digit_routes They are not signed like the 'keystone' routes which are numbered between 3-999, and thus, don't deserve to be in the ref tag, as that's for 'signed routes'. I did invite you SEVERAL times via PM back in January '15 (all the way till March '15) to join talk-us when we were talking about the quadrant routes so that you could explain why you thought they should be added in the ref tag since I knew you were adding the quadrant routes in the ref tags before then. However, you didn't, even after you said you would (several times).

Seriously, how many times do i have to mention to you that a single interchange on a section of highway doesn't mean that it's a motorway? I mentioned this in changeset/33674410 (where you didn't respond) when you did that along US-220 Alternate near State College a 2nd time after I fixed that area because you broke routing. Now you've done it here along PA-51 ( changeset/34237498#map=15/40.6170/-80.2412 ). Don't you realize you're breaking routing by doing this, especially for Bicycles?? When you falsely upgrade a highway to 'motorway', bicycle routing is broken because it's automatically assumed as 'bicycle=no' on that type of highway. If you look at the cycle map layer, you can clearly see that here on PA-51 (as well as on US-220 Alternate from that other changeset), both of them are major Bike PA routes.

Are you serious? That statement isn't really true. Especially for the bannered US routes here like US-40 Scenic. There are several 'US Highways' that are indeed secondary highways where they are located since they have been superseded by an Interstate and/or a more important state highway that is wider and is a higher quality road that the US Highway is now that is very close by. Plus, mainline US-40 right here is currently on I-68. You also have to factor in routing engine preferences to highway class, and tight curves that may no longer be suitable for big rigs to see if it might be worthy of any upgrade to a higher classification.

When you factor some of the stuff that I mentioned above, US-40 Scenic here should have clearly stayed as secondary IMO. I bet several other mappers would agree with me on this subject.