Heya! It's a good idea to mark the historic tag on the thing which is historic, not necessarily the address POI floating above it. If they all refer to the same thing, like a single historical building, you could merge the address tags into the building and add the historical tag to the building as well. Then we get rich data about not only where this historical object is but what sort of historical thing it is!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117140747

Feel free to combine multiple edits into one changeset as long as they're in a sane geographical area. And you're doing well enough you probably don't need to request review for every change, maybe just ones you're real unsure of. Good work!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117095315

Looking good! This data is actually useful for the county, someone approached me awhile ago about mapping all backyard water sources like pools and tanks, for fire trucks to reference during wildfires.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117094705

Looks good to me! When you get into footpaths that run alongside a road like a sidewalk, look into the sidewalk tagging page on the Wiki. There's a number of design choices you can make but I often like to cut to the chase and just add the sidewalk tag to most roads instead of separately mapping them... until you get into dense urban areas like courthouse square where it's more walkable and complex.

Either way, if you do draw footpaths separately, just make sure they connect back to something else routable like a road so they're usable by walking directions.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117094297

Thanks for adding this road! I already changed it from a residential to a service road since it seemed these roads wouldn't have names and the buildings would all take the address of the main road up front, but if that's wrong please do correct me.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116854250

Thanks for requesting review of this parking lot contribution! It looks perfect to me, the only way you could improve it is by adding the type, usually a "surface" lot as opposed to a garage, and surface, usually asphalt. If you're feeling really generous you can add how many spaces there are, whether it's open to the public, and whether it costs money or not. But there's nothing wrong with how it is!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116854039

Thanks for contributing this road and requesting review! FYI residential roads are roads that have names and are generally flush with the rest of the road grid. I updated this road to be a service road because it seems to just be the path cars take through the parking lot and the houses behind it all take the address of the main road. Check the Wiki for road tagging especially in parking lots, it can be confusing at first.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116853950

Oops I also forgot, you added a park and set its street name as "santero way" but we don't have a nearby street named that and we capitalize street names. Could you edit the park street tag and check where Santero Way actually is and update the map? I assume it's the newly constructed street that goes through this development? Thanks again!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116853742

Hi Goatku, thanks for your great contributions and for joining Sonoma County Openstreetmap!

Thank you for tagging these generic buildings as carports, and even going so far as to note their capacity. The only issue with this changeset is that the addresses put on the carports were duplicates of each other. It wasn't clear if any building on this property would actually get the address 771 without a unit number, so I just removed the address tags. (Sorry I didn't realize you'd added them, you caught this just in between us importing the buildings and me reviewing them so I didn't realize it wasn't our import mistake!)

Anyway, as long as address tags aren't duplicated it looks like you're doing a great job. Thanks again.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116853742

Looks great, and as before the address most properly belongs to the church, not the parking lot. We just completed a countywide address import, so >90% of all addresses should already exist. Because of where we got the data from, inside SR City limits addresses will usually be points floating on their own, and outside they will often be attached to a building. Regardless, there should always be one object for each unique address, and it's a judgment call whether you make that a point or copy it over to the whole building or both. A house or civic building for example probably doesn't need a separate address point floating around, whereas a strip mall should probably have each unit tagged with its own POI.

Anyway, that's a long winded way of saying welcome again to Sonoma County OSM and the only improvement here would be removing the address on things whose address is already tagged elsewhere.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117066923

Welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing! This changeset looks fine however minor correction, an address probably doesn't belong on a swimming pool. Even if the entire contents of an address were a public swimming pool, you'd probably tag the address on the building or whole facility (or just a single point out front) rather than giving the water itself an address. And in the case of an apartment complex, it's super likely that the address will be duplicated elsewhere, like the main office or front entrance. So removing the address tags here and making sure the address is properly represented elsewhere without duplication is a good improvement.

Finally, a major thing about pools is whether they're public, open to customers/residents, or private. So filling in the appropriate access tag is always nice for pools.

Thanks again and cheers!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117066902

Hi, thank you for contributing to my maproulette challenge, but how do you know this location has updated its branding? It's indoors so you'd have to live here to know.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116481930

What is `layer=POCKET`? Shows as a validation error in JOSM.

Welcome to OSM, thank you for your contributions! I've been managing the Sonoma County building and address import, and have worked with jrpear for his Santa Rosa address import (all the address POIs in town), so if you have any questions or would like to help make our local maps better please let me know!

It definitely "feels" like commuter rail to me -- I'd have to be a real nerd to notice a difference between it and LIRR or suburban overland NYC MTA for example besides age, style, number of cars, and electrification. But I'll let my vote be one drop in the bucket for wider consensus.

I guess at the end of the day I don't think SMART considers *itself* light rail, but rather the most affordable and pragmatic commuter rail given the constraints. When I hear light rail I think Seattle or Phoenix's rinky-dink glorified trollies, which are just a pretty different class and style of service.

It seems odd to call something light rail that isn't; not only the distance, speeds, track configuration and stations are different but the rolling stock itself is different. I can imagine plenty of rail where passenger service takes the majority but freight is also run in between at odd hours, that doesn't mean that the passenger service is suddenly somehow "light."

Put it this way, what is the desired end result? My first thought seeing smart tagged as light rail is that a data consumer would think oh, this is a <40mph lowrider inner-city line for urban commuting, with multiple stops per mile. And certainly not a >40mph full height inter-city line for suburban commuting with one or two stops per city. And so speed estimates for navigation would be totally off, appearance in the map would be off... and what data consumer thinks "oh, good thing I know it's light rail, that means freight runs on it in off-hours." OSM train afficionados, that's about it.

FYI somehow this changeset added a new overlapping Dutton Avenue to the existing one, which causes an overlapping highway validation error in JOSM

way/7722206

Thanks for all your hard work today! Overall it looks amazing.

Is there a reason why SMART has been changed in OSM to "light rail?" It fits no definition of "light rail" that I'm aware of.

Yeah it's a judgment call for sure, like where on earth is truly LGBT-exclusive, what would that look like? I myself am not part of the community and don't live in Seattle so anyone better informed is welcome to improve things.

There was some debate about this at the time, as an example of a place that would warrant this tag, especially on websites that categorize locations by lgbt-exclusivity. Ultimately those who attend this bar would be best equipped to decide, I'm just going off this page:

https://kuow.org/stories/why-capitol-hill-no-longer-gay-epicenter-seattle/