Some other examples where the 'motorway' tag is legit would be the Northern ends of both I-279 (way/28410636) and I-579 (way/54329607). Both of them are tagged as 'motorway' because they maintain the same speed limit of the highways they leave, they are both partial interchanges, and the 'ramps' aren't loops. Most of the time, if you come across a 'loop' ramp for the highway 'mainline' to continue on, hands down that needs to be tagged as a 'motorway_link', especially if it's just 1 lane.

Well, a good indicator I use most of the time is the # of lanes in absence of a 'motorway_junction' node if I haven't visited the place before to see the signage or travel the 'ramps'. Usually if there is just 1 lane, it's a '_link'. Of course, there are sometimes examples that buck that like this one on PA-28 (way/54581955). Another example would be the I-279/I-376 interchange here in Downtown Pittsburgh. I-279 use to be the through route up until 2009 when I-376 took over I-279 route between I-79 and Downtown along the Parkway West. However, we kept I-279 still as a motorway in that interchange, even though PennDOT goofed (in my opinion) and gave some of the ramps there I-376 exit numbers when they should have been '1x' numbers based on I-279 mileage, especially '70B' which really should have been 1A to match the number going SB on I-279, and 70C shouldn't have existed ever here since that's mainline I-279 (node/683700293).

Also, when doing this, it can break the 'ref' tag for exits in routing. With that same way as an example, routers can now be confused as to which way the 'ref' for the 'motorway_junction' needs to be applied since I don't think any use the 'ref:right' or 'ref:left' tags yet for exit numbers. There are several things you have to take into account before just blindly changing the highway type, especially if you haven't traveled on said highway before.

I'm sorry, but this statement isn't always true. Case in point, you edited I-79 at both of it's intersections with I-70 changing the ways from 'motorway_link' to 'motorway'. I've traveled them 100+ times each way during my life. The way they are built is clearly as '_link'. Especially way/15020549 (way/15020549). Only the brand new 2-lane 'mainline' NB ramp at the 'Southern' interchange movement of I-79 NB -> I-70 WB can be classified as a 'motorway'. It used to be a tight 270 degree loop to do that movement which was tagged as a _link. Then in the last few years, it was 'finally' replaced by the new alignment (trust me, the old ramp was a killer).

Ah, ok. Just have a backlog of changesets that intersect my town that I've been going through and this just happened to have the BB that intersected my RSS watch area.

Can you please use a proper 'source' tag? If you're adding data via 'mapillary', that doesn't count as a 'survey', as a 'survey' means you physically visited the place. So, can you please change future similar changesets to have 'mapillary' as the source instead?

So, would you like me to fix up the relations here to properly reflect that?

If I'm correct, let me know and I can fix this up for ya and eliminate the unnecessary relations.

Just so I understand, both sides of Marlin Dr must turn right onto Bower Hill Rd with an 'All Traffic Must Turn Right' sign, correct? Then you should use the 'Only Right Turn' relation instead ( osm.wiki/Relation:restriction#Mandatory_restriction ). Simple, and to the point without any extra relations that aren't needed.

Just so you know, the turn restrictions weren't necessary. All that needed to be done was add 'access=no' tags to the old bridge. That would have easily done the job. ;)

Well, it's mostly because they aren't 'signed' routes. Adding the 'route=road' would possibly trigger a rendering of the 'ref=9' tag on any map that uses the relations for rendering.

I'm curious as to why you added the tags 'route=road' & 'road=US:I' to relation/1319303 (relation/1319303) in this changeset. Those types of relations for the "US:NHS High Priority Corridors" shouldn't be getting those tags and should be considered as a False Positive when validating in JOSM.

Somebody had already added it pretty much as a 'US:NHS High Priority Corridors' relation. See: relation/1319303

I don't agree with you there Paul. That part should still be a 'motorway' for the reasons I mentioned in my comment above.

If you would like me to do this, please let me know here in the comments and I'll get to it as soon as I hear back from ya. :)

So, I would in this case per your changeset comment, leave just 'Washington Road' in the 'name' tag, and add 'West Liberty Avenue' to the 'name:left' tag, and also add Washington Road to the 'name:right' tag (just for clarity) on way/376546213.

Just so you know, when a road has 'two' names for a segment like this, you should use 'name:right' & 'name:left' depending on which direction the way itself in OSM is going. See: name=*

Well, I would think it would be open because they still need to have access to the bank (mentioned in article) there. Plus, there's this tweet (from 2013) saying that the jughandle part will stay open. https://twitter.com/murrysvillepd/status/332443266219921409

The article happens to mention that the road is still open to buses. So, it needs to be tagged a tad differently. I've tweaked the tagging to reflect that buses can still use the road. Tweaked in changeset/34691400. changeset/34691400

Actually, the part of I-70 from the toll plaza to the US-30 ramps is a motorway. Part of the original PA Turnpike, & has a high speed limit of 55mph (from what I remember the last time I was there, it's been a few years) for most of the length till right near where the ramps split for access to US-30. Unless you're talking about way/374896919 (way/374896919) Paul, then I do fully agree that that way should be a 'motorway_link'.