Kindly refer to changeset/37558311 for the modifications I made. And to the boundary=protected_area as reference for detailed mapping of protected areas.

Also, the Lifecycle Prefix tags: osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Thanks for the contribution. Keep on mapping!

... based on the Senate bill.

Also, perhaps you would consider reverting the AMWS boundaries back to version 1, then create a new boundary tagged with a `proposed:` prefix

Thank you for the prompt response. Much appreciated.

I brought this changeset to the attention of some of the local OSM mappers and mentioned that it's premature to modify the boundaries based on a bill. Please check out the `proposed:` life cycle tag prefix which seems appropriate in this case: osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

With reference to Agusan Marsh, as a protected area, the Ramos-era Executive Order is the prevailing law, and defines the AMWS boundary.

The marsh, as a natural feature, is still undefined until we obtain better data or imagery.

Please join the informal, online discussions of the local OpenStreetMap community at http://is.gd/osmphchat

Sorry for the short reply. I'm mobile. I'll elaborate when I get back to my computer.

What do you mean by your "Fix me" comments? What kind of help do you need?

Hello. Can you provide a link to your source?

This appears to be just a *bill* and is not a law, and will not have any legal weight.

Hi Eli. It's not necessary to tag hydrants with name, like
name=Hydrant

For details, check out:
emergency=fire%20hydrant

Great to see you using OsmAnd now. :)

What are the sources of these edits?

Try this grid, Lucas: http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/1509#task/62

As long as the data you're mapping is on-the-ground, and can be validated, i don't see why it should be a problem.

what do you mean by "this edition" and what "important study" are you referring to?

Hello Lucas. You might want to wait for the Paypay tasking before you update this area, which should utilize the new MapGive imagery.

Am glad to see you still mapping!

If you're looking for mapping tips, check out the wiki pages:

* [PH Mapping Convetions] (osm.wiki/Philippines/Mapping_conventions)
* [Good Practices] (osm.wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element)
* [Learn OpenStreetMap](http://learnosm.org)

For questions or concerns, you may reach out to other OSM-PH contributors through any of the following:

* [Discourse Chat](https://goo.gl/X2XeQE)
* [OpenStreetMap Help Chat](http://is.gd/askosmph)
* [OSMPH on Slack](https://osmph.slack.com/home)
* [FB page](http://fb.com/OSMph)
* [FB community](https://www.facebook.com/groups/175398442797542)
* [Goolge Plus](https://goo.gl/qk7cfn)
* [Mailing list](https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/)

We all look forward to more edits from you. Please feel free to get in touch any time.

Regards,
GOwin

Here, check out an existing route:
relation/4515959

Cool! I hope you'd complete the Green Frog bus route relation, too. :)

For your reference: osm.wiki/Public_transport#Buses

If you need anything, ping other mappers for a hand:
* [Chat Room](https://goo.gl/X2XeQE)
* [FB page](http://fb.com/OSMph)
* [FB community](https://www.facebook.com/groups/175398442797542)
* [Goolge Plus](https://goo.gl/qk7cfn)
* [Mailing list](https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/)

Are you sure about that tag for a "stage"? A public building looks alright, but a `shelter` doesn't look appropriate.
amenity=shelter
name=Stage
shelter_type=picnic_shelter

In the Philippines, a "stage" is probably best tagged as amenity=theater.

See: amenity=theatre

@rukku
Kindly do the revert. Thanks.

@rokku

highway=bus_stop tags are not incorrect, and is usable for routing apps and software.

If this node is also a shelter, simply add:
shelter=yes

Removing bus_stop is unnecessary. Kindly revert, and simply add the shelter tag.

For reference, see: highway=bus_stop

Thank you.

Rukku,
are you taking out the operator tag because it's not Meralco's?

Name tags are not necessary to tag features, so there is no need to add them, as is the case here.

In an ideal network route map, both physical railways can be added. But, taking advantage of the flexibility of OSM relations make this unnecessary.

I hope I understood your question correctly. Thank you.