Hello UE_Su, and thanks again for all of the edits you are making to OSM!

These roads are used for residential purposes, hence they are "highway=residential." It doesn't matter what their physical characteristics are as long as they can provide vehicular access to places where people live, and that is what they are primarily used for. We just had a discussion about a similar topic on the tagging mailing list and the conclusion was that physical characteristics should not matter when it comes to highway classification (except for motorways someone noted). In any event, it is quite common here in Colorado for people to live along dirt roads, either in the mountains, or on our eastern plains.

It also doen't matter what the access restrictions are, as long as at least the people that live along it can use it, in fact, many of these are access=private.

highway=unclassified is actually a higher classification than highway=residential. Since these do not lead anywhere except to people's houses, highway=unclassified would not be appropriate.

No problems that I know of with routing software.

I am sorry I don't read German so I cannot comment on what the German wiki says.

Many of these roads which you have tagged as highway=track are residential roads, you can tell by the houses visible along them in satellite imagery. Just because roads appear to be unpaved doesn't mean that they are "tracks." OSM uses a functional classification for the highway tag, not a physical classification.

Hello again, Thanks for all of the edits in OSM! I see you have changed a number of residential roads to tracks. These should be tagged "highway=residential" because they provide access to people's homes and cabins. "tracks" are for ways that are for agricultural and forestry purposes. highway=track

Another question. Is node/7164807886 really a historic castle? I don't think there are any castles of any sort in Fort Collins. It does look like Dan Binkley is the current owner of this property, are you Dan? We generally don't put individual's names in OSM for privacy reasons, even if it is our own name.

Hello,

Thanks for editing OpenStreetMap. Is node/7164807687 real? What is your source and what exactly is it? I am very familiar with this area and have never heard of a "Test Site" at this location, or anywhere near here.

Never mind, I found this document from the City of Fort Collins that mentions it:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=2ahUKEwi9jK3zyLTpAhUQnKwKHXhcAvsQFjABegQIAxAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcitydocs.fcgov.com%2F%3Fcmd%3Dconvert%26vid%3D192%26docid%3D1612136%26dt%3DStreet%2BMap&usg=AOvVaw2OXJl8Xak1MNzg17CoZ17e

Hi Mike,

Do you have a source for the name "Harmony Reservoir" for this feature: way/23599227? It is not named on the USGS Topo and I don't think it is in the GNIS? Perhaps it is mentioned in some city document?

Mike

Hello,
What is the source for the name "Turtles and Pelicans" on this body of water: way/48606758

Thanks Terry Owen and phidauex.

Interesting. The way this came to my attention is I received permission from the City GIS Department to use their data in OSM. I started doing a comparison (not an import) on the water bodies data, and where there are discrepancies, I am doing additional research. In this case the GIS data from the City says this lake is "unnamed." I will provide feedback to the GIS Department.

Mike

Hi Terry,

Thanks for the edits to OpenStreetMap!

I am curios to know what the source is for the name "Shuster Lake." I live in the area and have not heard to it referred to as that (but I could have missed it).

Thanks,
Mike

Hello,

Thanks for the edits!

I see in this change set you added the name "Jodee Reservoir" to a body of water. I am curious what the source is for this name. Is there a sign along the trail perhaps?

Thanks,
Mike

Nice work! One has to be quick around here to be able to make edits to a new area!

jdoniche,
Thanks again for all of the edits. This is a big help in rural areas.
I noticed that the wiki page you cited in the change set comments list some of the users involved in this effort, but I didn't see yours. Perhaps I missed it.
Mike

Thanks for all of the edits!

OSM uses a functional road classification. Driveways should be tagged "highway=service, service=driveway", you can use additional tags, such as surface, to indicate its physical condition.

Vaidhev,

Your driver very well may have described that road as "a track." That
would be a reasonable description in informal American English. OSM
uses a more formal classification based on function rather than the
physical condition of the road. In OSM "highway=track" are for ways
that are for forest or agricultural access. Since this way goes to
someone's home, it should be tagged as "highway=service,
service=driveway"

Keep up the good work,

Mike

Hi, Thanks for all of the edits. Normally driveways are tagged highway=service (which you did in this case), and service=driveway. I am going to correct this case.

Hi, Thanks for all of the edits. I see you have added some driveways in this change set. That is great. Normally driveways are tagged highway=service (which you did), and service=driveway. I will go ahead and change these ways.

Hi, Thanks for all of the great edits. The way (782009843) which this change set created appears to be a driveway. Driveways are usually tagged highway=service, service=driveway, not highway=track. The driveway can be further defined by tags such as width=*, surface=* if those are known. I will go ahead and fix this case.

Per the change set comment, this change set modified way/6174958 to match ESRI World Imagery (Clarity) Beta, however, it doesn't match that imagery, particularly towards its western end (where the road in question doesn't seem to exist at all).

You make some good points, but the rule in OSM is we do not tag for the renderer [0], and we only use the name tag for the name[1]. If we start putting other information in the name tag we will start getting (difficult, experience hikers only, no bikes, dogs not allowed, etc.). You think it is important to indicate that this is "off trail" (which isn't really correct anyway, it is a trail, just not an official trail), others may think that the app they use doesn't properly symbolize these other characteristics, and so will modify the name to suit their needs. It is up to data consumers to properly symbolize and label features. I recommend that you open issues with the application that you use which are not symbolizing this features in a manner you find appropriate. In the case of open source apps, you can create a pull request.

[0] osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
[1] osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only