According to the Wiki, the Parks Hwy certainly meets the conditions needed to class it as highway=trunk.

What is your reasoning to change the class of this section of the Parks Highway from trunk to primary? Nothing has changed on the physical highway where your change occurs. The classification has been changed once before you did it.
What's going on?
Cheers,
Dave

I changed that one to highway=path - it is much more visible on the new DigitalGlobe imagery. I have no way to tell what the "trail" actually looks like and because of its remoteness I never will, so that's only a guess. I'll work on it again and check the stream crossings when I have more time.

Tried that already. It's not there. This is an annoying issue but one I cani' seem to rid myself of.

Sorry, It is a typo, caused by JOSM "remembering" a bad value. I cannot locate any place in JOSM that contains the text "fof" that I used by mistake over a year ago but JOSM insert it sometimes still. It's supposed to be "footway".

Can you tell me why you decided to raise the classification of the Seward Highway to "trunk"?
Even though that highway is a major artery in Alaska, it does not really meet the Wiki definition of a trunk road.
Regards,
AlaskaDave

It's most likely some sort of caching or currency problem with the OSM server. I'm sure it will render okay eventually.

I have spent the morning fixing errors in multipolygons and guess what? I redrew a portion of the coastline of Shuyak Island when I fixed up the Perevalnie Islands but forgot to add that new section to the coastline multipolygon. Rendering looks right now.

The OSM approval process leaves a lot to be desired. I ran a similar discussion through the tagging list and could not resolve the issue. Besides, even if "approved" by the requisite number of mappers, it still isn't "official" in any way.

Consequently, I'm not waiting for approval on this particular issue.

Thanks for the gound check.

It's a rendering issue of some sort. I added Shuyak Island State Park using rough boundaries back in January. Coastllnes seem to be invisible with the current tagging using leisure=park although I can see them fine in my custom maps.
Just now I altered the tagging a bit to use boundary=protected_area and leisure=nature_preserve which is probably more correct. Let's see what difference that makes.

I chose the building based a photo in the article and a quick look at Google Streetview to confirm that its shape is the same - a high drive-through bay and a 1-story section that contains the office so I'm confident it's correct.
As for tagging shop=herbalist, yes, I think that's misleading. Marijuana is legal in Colorado and needn't, shouldn't, be disguised as something else.
I had some discussions on he tagging list about marijuana grow facilities and there were some who opined that it wouldn't be wise to reveal the locations of such places for fear of reprisals by police or other government personnel. I countered with, it's just as legal as liquor and prescription drugs in many states, and IMO arguably less harmful. Why wouldn't I want to tag them as shop=cannabis?
By the way, I don't see the drive=through you added, only the one I added. ???

Hi,
I placed the new Tumbleweed Express marijuana shop on the old car wash building in Parachute just now. I based my positioning on an article in today's Wash. Post. I see you have two other places on the same street named Tumbleweed, tagged with hop=herbalist. Are both of those businesses still located there? Are those place both cannabis shops, or do they sell herbal product other than cannabis?

2017-04-19 The original CanVec imports used many individual nodes labeled name=Kaskawulsh Glacier and natural=glacier. I removed those and added the name to several existing natural=glacier multipolygons. Recently reported changes in this glacier mean its present outline is not the same as shown.on OSM

You forgot to finish tagging this object leaving only a rectangle with area=yes. I removed rectangle and inserted a highway=footway and bridge tags.

You forgot to finish tagging this object leaving only a rectangle with area=yes. I removed rectangle and inserted a bridge in the highway.

Okay, we did it!

Keep on mapping!

Yes, I found it too. But we're both trying to correct it at the same time LOL

it's here:
62.03923364985006, -150.08611523313525

Can you hold off for a moment to let me upload my changes and we'll see if there's any disagreement.

I can not find any references to the Dr Suess House at this location. Can you tell me how you located this place?

All the items I found in a Google search seem to be near Willow, on the north side of Willow Creek

I agree it's a local name but I like it anyway. I don't want to get rid of it. My question really was, would you object if I changed the name of the section north of Doi Saket to Chiang Mai-Chiang Rai Road? Once it passes Doi Saket, that seems to be a more appropriate name.

Every time I drive along here I wonder if the name of the road after passing Doi Saket should actually be Chiang Mai-Chiang Rai? As you know, road names in Thailand are poorly marked and I think I was the one who originally added the names to this highway. Not sure how I arrived at the naming anyway.

Anyway, just wondering. See you next week.