Hello Wolf, do you know what the purpose of way/837453838 is? It has no tags, is the length of the state of R.I. and appears very close to the border. I don't think it should exist. I'm not sure if there are others similar to it, but I noticed this will looking at some other things.

Hello Oregon. I'm trying to understand the reason that the long ways were split up into small road segments when you were adding stop signs. (way/522775123 for example)

There shouldn't be any need to break them up as far as I'm aware, but maybe you know some reason that I haven't considered yet. I'd like to get them all combined back into a single way (when appropriate) but don't want to break anything you've worked on.

Is there some need for a single road to be made up of dozens of small segments?

Thanks.

I've removed what I can only assume is vandalism on the "VALOR" building. If I've done this in error, please let me know how.

Hi grant977, first off, thanks for all of your great contributions to OSM with all of the golf course mapping you've done recently. However, I've noticed a lot of QA errors are being raised for some of your ways, specifically nodes that have the same exact lon/lat values. I see from this changeset that it looks like the iD editor might be flagging those as well (warnings:close_nodes:vertices). Are you seeing these errors when you edit? It would be great if you could take a minute to clean them up before you submit so that others won't have to later. If you're not seeing these, we should probably file a bug against iD to make sure they are more visible. Thanks!

Thanks! Those building shapes look a lot more sane now. :)

Hello Ohio,

You might want to go back and look at your import in this changeset (and possibly others using the same methodology). There are a ton of unconnect nodes being dropped all over the place. And for a possibly related reason, some of the house geometry is making some strange non-rectangle zig zags around. Check out the following node in a sea of other unconnected nodes: node/7791950986

Hi there jwneptune,

Roads are already mapped for that stretch and they have appropriate speed limits defined. If those speeds are incorrect, you should modify the existing ways instead of adding additional ones along with the old ones. Also, make sure you include the units along with the speed (e.g. "35 mph") instead of just "35". I've gone ahead and deleted the two roads you added in this change. If there are multiple speed limits for the road, just split the way in two at the speed limit change and set the resulting sub-segments to the new limits.

Hi Knikitha, Do you know what happened here? I've seen a couple of these parking aisles today that are splayed out across buildings and existing aisles in ways that are highly unlikely. Is there some systemic error that can be fixed here? Thanks.

Sorry for not being specific in my original comment. I usually remember to mention an exact way url. This is the way that no exists and I'm not sure the incline tag is correct: way/820207768 If you could take a look and correct/verify it, that would be great. Thanks.

1) It was a discussion on the OSM US Slack channel. I have a vague recollection that I only mentioned it because JOSM complained about them overlapping, but I'm not 100% sure about that.
2) If it were me, I'd just mark up to an existing building, but not intersect it.

Anyway, it's not worth arguing over. I just thought I'd mention it and see if you're amenable to adjusting your mapping slightly.

Say Hi to Benny for me.

I conferred with others in the community and they agreed that when outlining woods like these that the way should include just the base of the trees and not their canopy so that we avoid having woods and buildings overlap each other.

Hello Doctor,
This change did something funky with a park and I'm not sure what it should look like and what you're trying to map. Can you take a look at way/565581544 and adjust as appropriate? Thanks.

Hi Dillon, a separate issue from what user_5359 mentioned is that you tried to define a residential area, but you only drew a single line instead of a polygon. I would fix it, but I'm not sure where you wanted to indicate the residential area is.

FYI, the woods that you added overlap with a house/building that added a year ago. I'm assuming that the house is still there, but I didn't dig too deep. Here is the house in question: way/652523803

Hi Stephen, did you actually change anything in this changeset? Is there an error in your workflow, or a problem with JOSM or OSM? Just curious.

Hi Juergen. Thanks for all of your contributions to OSM in the past day or two. I've noticed a slight problem with how you stop drawing a way (path) and I thought I'd mention it so that you can correct how you do it in the future. Say you want to draw four nodes: A, B, C, and D. I notice that you click A, then B, then C, then D, and then back to C to stop drawing a line. The correct way to stop drawing is to just click D a second time. I'm cleaning up the cases I've found of this, so there is nothing you need to do to fix previous contributions. Thanks.

Hi there skinnyhunt05. I removed the golf cart paths that duplicated the existing residential roads on Barleywood, Collinwood, and Glenwood Drives, and Village Parkhouse Gatehouse Road and added a "golf_cart=yes" tag to the existing roads to indicate that golf carts are allowed there. As I understand it, a duplicate path shouldn't be used, but instead have appropriate tags added to existing roads. If you know otherwise, please let me know. Thanks.

I've removed the new Cinemark that you created since there is already one defined. If I'm misunderstanding the purpose for the duplicate, please let me know. Thanks.

Hi there. Thanks for making a bunch of contributions to the map. I just wanted to point out a couple small problems so that you can avoid them in your future mapping sessions. First, sidewalks shouldn't have a "name=Sidewalk" tag. Instead, there is a "footway=sidewalk" tag that should be used. Second, ways shouldn't cross over themselves or double back on themselves. So in this change, where you come to a corner, and then double back away from the corner, a new path should be started.
No need to clean up what you've already done, I'll take care of the ones that I find, but if you could keep these in mind in the future, it would be appreciated.
Thanks, and keep up the great mapping.

Hi Twissler. First off, thanks for the work you're putting into updating the map. Unfortunately this particular change has a lot of problems so I've reverted it back to before you did you changes. When you shifted that bike path, the ends of the path where it connected with other ways got all messed up and created a big problem to clean up.
I'm guessing you shifted it because it wasn't matching a satellite image of the area that you were using. Unfortunately, this is quite common and isn't easy to deal with and know which imagery set is correct and which is off by several meters. You don't mention using additional data sources like GPS traces to verify that your imagery was correct, so I'm not sure your move was actually making things better or not. If you did, my apologies and I'll see what I can do to help you reset things back to the way you had them. Feel free to reach out.