Hello!

At a minimum, I see there's a bit of doc deficiency here. Thanks for pointing it out. There was more information in the tasking manager project but I see that the detailed info is no longer available after the projected is completed and in "archive" status.

The short version is that several mappers in KS had identified that this area could use an overhaul of address data (and other information) due to the low quality of a few previous imports. One of the issues was somewhat dodgy mapping of building tagging from the original dataset to OSM tags. When discussing with mappers in the Kansas channel of the OSMUS Slack and the global Discord, the consensus was to "downgrade" some of the specific tagging to buliding=yes so it could be reviewed/resurveyed by local folks (ex:StreetComplete has a popular building=yes quest).

As for addr:country, the ESRI data endpoint had exceptionally good unit level address information so almost every address tag got remove for the refresh. There were also a lot of things (random nodes, roadways etc) that, in my experience, don't have addr:country tags in the United States.

All that said, if there's an area you'd like me to review or a set of tags you think should be returned to items, that's super useful information and I'm happy to work on it.

Matt

You got it. I have a big cleanup of these in my work queue. Hopefully get to them all over the next few weeks.

Hello!

While doing some cleanup of cities from the ESRI Address feed, I noticed some of the addr:city here ended up as "Unincorporated". I'm happy to patch them up using the USPS zip locator but wanted to let you know in case you think there's a better solution.

Matt

For folks using iD and JOSM, having a bunch of relations in the editing area can make things quite frustrating to edit.

I totally hear you about selecting can be a bother. iD has '\' as a hotkey for "select the next way that shares this node" and JOSM has the rather cumbersome "middle click to cycle through coincident objects". It's also not helped by iD trying pretty hard to hide that relations are a thing or JOSM pulling all relation selection/editing into it's own side interface. And don't get me started on relations of relations ha.

I'll have to fire up Merkaartor sometime, differences in editors definitely can make "best practice" more difficult.

Hello!

I would love to continue the discussion over at: changeset/136645299 regarding your addition of relations with only outer ways (ex: relation/15953082#map=18/57.64039/-1.96913) vs leaving the ways as is.

Again, I currently think this is generally not great practice and would love to hear more from you about this practice. I don't see anything on the wiki (osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon) that supports editing the map in this fashion but perhaps I've missed something obvious.

If there's no articulatable benefit, it would best to discontinue the practice.

Just wanted to say the work on this park is great! So crisp!!

Teamwork makes the dream work.

It was mostly upset about conflicts along the Gila Subdivision rail line related to the water crossings (ex:way/760268588/history#map=19/32.37332/-111.10338) I've done a scan of the ones along here and they seem in tact.

Thanks for the reply. My general feeling is that having multi-polygons with only outer members (relation/15912390) (relation/13951181) achieves very little and makes it more difficult for other editors. Entangling too much geometry into relations creates a burden down the line in my experience.

In the interest of having a more concrete discussion, I've submitted my preferred way to map things like this and would appreciate it if you could take a look and let me know if you think any nuance is lost. If I've damaged things then I can revert and will have learned something interesting.

changeset/136948759

Thanks!

Hello!
Another mapper (UrbanUnPlanner) had an open changeset when this went in and asked me to do the conflict resolution (changeset/136947123) I think your changes are all still intact but wanted to let you know in case I've botched something. Would you mind taking a look?

Hello!

The name=rumah tag should not be added. The name tag is not for description.

You can also make things look a lot more crisp by squaring corners before upload. Select a building and press the 'q' key.

Matt

Stumbled across these while doing address data addition. Nice work!

Hello!

Can you help me understand why some of the features have been grouped into multi-polygon relations when I would expect the already existing tagged ways are preferable? For example this: relation/15912391

In general, my experience is that grouping things like this just makes edits more cumbersome for other mappers and I don't see how these areas of scrub are logically "one feature".

There's also this relation that previously was a simple way way/968226915 ... the benefit is unclear.

Any clarity you can provide is appreciated.

Thanks!

Hello! Thanks for contributing. I wanted to let you know that the names on these are unnecessary and not what the name field is used for. It is only needed if the house has a specific different name. I see you already have building=house and building=yes which already indicates "RUMAN" or "BANGUNAN" respectively. You can read more about it here:
osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

I have corrected the tagging here. Let me know if there's anything else I can help with.

I've added address data along this road that should help divide East/West directional. I'm not local, would you be able to take a look and see if you can make sense of it?

Oh that looks like a decent tag. Good find Woazboat.

WestCoastNick, would you be able to adjust the tagging and move the "Permanently Closed" portion to a more suitable non-name tag?

I'm surprised to see landuse=military here. Can you help me understand?

I would guess that the name fields of "Permanently Closed" are better as note= or description= tags. osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Wonderful. I'll give it a watch. If you're attending this year, I'd love to say hello.

Just wanted to say the parks around here look really nice. Great mapping!

Hello!

Thanks for the contribution. You can make the building crisp by squaring the corners (click the building, press 'q').

One oddity of OSM is that we store all names in unabbreviated form. In this case the street names should be expanded to their full text. It's a bit odd but keep things nice and clear.

I've done both of those edits just now so you can see what that looks like.

Happy mapping, definitely let me know if you have any questions!