The park, trail, or both?

tourism=information + information=route_marker

Is there really a sign with that name there?

tourism=attraction

Tourist attractions? 🤔

node/11766261580
node/11943008980
node/11758712561

Nice! Not only does that solve the access tag overload problem, but also avoids the canoe/kayak/sup/paddlecraft/etc nomenclature debate.

I waited until it was clear on the Wiki, despite OsmAnd's excellent support for the whitewater community's narrowly focused tags, that canoe was thee generic term for paddlecraft and canoe=put_in;egress was how transitions between water and land were to be tagged. Then, in a frenzy of stolen time, created the OpenStreetBrowser paddling categories [1], converted Michigan whitewater tags to canoe, and added a note to the Michigan wiki's cheat sheet to help encourage consistency.

Since the creation of the categories, I have seen many new route=canoe appearing in the U.S.. Not sure about canoe=put_in/egress.

So… Is it time to add support for waterway=access_point to OpenStreetBrowser? Maybe make it function the same as canoe=put_in/egress. Leaving support for canoe=put_in/egress for a time.

Any thoughts on tagging portages? Right now, the "Paddling Amenity" category highlights ways tagged canoe=portage.

[1]
* https://github.com/plepe/openstreetbrowser-categories-main/blob/master/paddling_amenities.yaml
* https://github.com/plepe/openstreetbrowser-categories-main/blob/master/paddling_hazards.yaml
* https://github.com/plepe/openstreetbrowser-categories-main/blob/master/paddling_routes.yaml

Regarding node/2125473109

Where did the use of waterway=access_point come from?

I do not find it on the waterway page, nor anywhere else after a few quick searches of the wiki.
waterway=*

That location is a canoe=put_in;egress
I see now that back when I updated its tags I had forgot to add "egress". Still, it shows up well enough on OpenStreetBrowser.
https://openstreetbrowser.org/#map=17/44.65966/-84.71000&basemap=osm-mapnik&categories=paddling_hazards,paddling_routes,paddling_amenities

See the Michigan Wiki page:
osm.wiki/Michigan#Water

Regarding way/1297721460

That new segment is part of a larger trail network. SpeedyChix updated its tags that she found mismatched with the leading and trailing segments. I then saw that it had not been added to the West Lansing Trail relation, so I merged it with the of rest of the Fine Park loop.

I have found where you have changed path to cycleway a couple of times. This conversation began after I discovered this edit (while talking to someone cycling The Great Lake to Lake Trail). It is, however, 11 months old and things may have changed since then.
way/813680569

The source of truth for all things OpenStreetMap (and the mechanism used for determining future truths) is the Wiki. From what I have gathered reading the wiki is "footway" and "cycleway" pre-date "path" by many years. They likely came from British legal terms. As OpenStreetMap matured the access and path tags were added. The big different between footway, cycleway, and path is their implied access values.

* footway is foot=dedicated
* cycleway is bicycle=dedicated
* path is motor_vehicle=no

From access=* :
"Access values pre-eminently describe legal permissions/restrictions and should follow ground truth, such as signage or legal ruling, and not involve guesswork. It does not describe common or typical use, even if the signage is generally ignored."

In Michigan, we primarily use the "Signposted foot and bicycle path." example found here:
highway=path

See the Michigan wiki for further explanation. If that page isn't clear, let me know and I will try to improve it.
osm.wiki/Michigan#Pedestrian_ways

Have you been on these trails? I live on the east side of the river and have verified every mapped inch of these trails. When I can, I upload new GPS traces to OpenStreetMap after I have walked or rode the trail in person. I plan to soon capture new Mapillary imagery of the West Lansing Trail. There are a few sections I had yet to get to, but I am sure myself or one of the other local mappers (one I expect to come unglued when they see these edits hitting the MMMBA trails) will get to them eventually. Adding unverified movements seen in Stava Heat Map is adding noise and making unsanctioned paths look official. I would suggest verifying the data before copying from it.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153380077

Why the change from highway=path to highway=cycleway?

> otherwise both of the names will render?

Depends on the renderer, but in general, yes. A name will render for every object given a name. Trail names in bridges make it look like the bridge has a name of its own. Even more confusing, a search for a name will return every object given that name. It can be hard to pick out a trail's overall relation amongst the noise.

> Just leave it blank or label the path with a local trail name?

When I do not have the time to create a relation and document it on our Michigan trail project's wiki page [1], or the trail is short, I will add the name just to the trail's largest segment. Naming one segment is enough to make the trail render, be searchable, and show amongst routing instructions. And, I only name a thing after I have found its name on a sign or official document [2].

[1] osm.wiki/Michigan/Trails
[2] osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don't_use_name_tag_to_describe_things

You mean besides the general cautions against importing/copying other people's work because it may be inaccurate / out of date, have an incompatible license, or clash with what is already mapped ...

This case it might be fine. It's just that I only map what I surveyed or verified. Lincoln Brick Park has been on my to-do list for a very long time. Before I could map it I had to walk its trails again to capture and upload GPS traces to OpenStreetMap. Maybe even capture Mapillary imagery.

When I map, I am always thinking of things like the families who will use my edits to walk a new trail or the person trying to route their wheelchair across town, or the self-driving car depending on the accuracy of my edits. In all these cases it is better that the data is accurate than every area is filled in with something.

Last I looked, Trailfork's data is not licensed in a compatible way for use in OpenStreetMap. The various other sources may have the same problem. For accuracy and licensing, physical surveys of an area should be the preferred method of data collection.

For quick access to changeset discussions, bookmark this:
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=10927321&showblockedcontributors

Or the top of that site: https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?Trail_Caretaker

OSMCha has a speech bubble for changesets with disucussions:
https://osmcha.org/?filters=%7B%22users%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%22Trail_Caretaker%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22Trail_Caretaker%22%7D%5D%2C%22date__gte%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%22%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22%22%7D%5D%7D

You mean, you didn't survey it to see if these trails actually exist and collect GPS traces?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153389221

This is a multi-use path, not a cycleway.
* highway=path
* osm.wiki/Michigan#Pedestrian_ways

The names are on the respective relations. No need to also have the name on the way. Look at the various renders, doing so is causing an echo affect with the name doubled up and confusing.

It would help if _someone_ wasn't going behind us undoing all this work. 😒
changeset/139847915

It prevents routing for walking and wheelchair use. And some of these paths allow horses or ATVs.

Yesterday I rode, with a 360 camera, another 16 miles (32 total) of The Great-Lake-To-Lake trail, starting at Wixom to Pontiac. The section was also signed to give walkers the right-of-way and the "abandoned railway" has long since been replaced or lost to time.

I don't get to do these rides often, so it will be slow going waiting for me to correct them. 😏

It is easy to do and I did the same. Seems everyone has to do it for some number of miles before they realize the error.

I only mentioned it on this old edit as I thought you might be able to help new comers avoid the same mistake.

I was just there and captured some Mapillary imagery along Lakeshore Drive. That was definitely a multi-use path (cycleway means bicycle=designated).
osm.wiki/Michigan#Pedestrian_ways