you're absolutely right, that wasn't intended. i must have been trying to remove tags from the member ways and selected all members by mistake. it will be corrected shortly, if it hasn't been already.

Hi there! It looks like you may have accidentally modified Channahon's administrative boundary. Please be more careful in the future.

The iD editor has options to turn boundary features off so that you can avoid modifying them by accident, I would encourage you to use that setting.

can you please be a little more careful when you're editing near administrative boundaries? your landuse edits modified a county and a city boundary.

the iD editor has the option of completely turning off administrative boundaries to avoid this kind of thing in the future.

ha! i admittedly didn't look at member way tags much beyond a few removals of TIGER stuff. looks like the congo's been there since changeset/115121457

did i hit a timezone boundary or something?

wait, this relation probably doesn't even need to exist. the name is "unincorporated"...

aw, shoot. i thought i was being super careful, but some of these boundaries are a mess. i will take a look at it right now, thanks for the notice!

thank you for adding landuse areas to the map! please take more care, however, that you do not glue features to administrative boundaries. in the iD editor, you can turn boundary features off entirely to avoid doing this in the future.

it wasn't really a "mistake", the ref is for the route relation, not the roads. but i get it, some legacy renderers still need the ref tag on the member ways for shields. i was being a bit cavalier in clearing ref tags

How does it seem more major? The way area residents and commuters use this road is pretty consistent with a collector road.

IDOT's classification scheme is a good starting point, but it does not map directly to OSM tags.

Your overpass link isn't working. But yes, it's true that there are not many tertiary state routes. I have to repeat, though, that being a state route does not *make* a road a higher classification. There's certainly some correlation there, but a road's classification should be considered apart from any numbered route it may participate in.

Highway classification is about a road's functional importance in the broader network, not its legal status, jurisdiction, or physical characteristics. This road, in this area, is simply not that important.

I thought the north end had connected to another Primary at one point, but it's probably fine as Secondary, then. Thanks!

being a state highway doesn't automatically upgrade classification. you can refer to IDOT's traffic count data, and you'll see that traffic on IL 31 across the river sees more than double the use on average (11k vs 4k). and douglas road, east of here, which is not a numbered route at all, actually sees more traffic than *either*. by sheer numbers, IL 25 is not the primary connection between these places, but i have also had discussions longtime area residents, and they confirm that. IL 25 is tertiary at best, at least up to Aurora

what's the basis for changing the classification here? the prior classification was done based on local knowledge, regional importance of the road, traffic counts, and communication with the county highway department

what's the basis for changing the classification here?

i guess such a short stretch doesn't feel like a trunk road to me. i don't have a hard limit in mind, but i feel like for a road to temporarily "upgrade" its class, it needs to be for a longer stretch than just this? the trunk section of 56, for instance, goes from I 88 to where it merges back down from being a divided highway.

hello! what's the reasoning behind 47 briefly being a trunk road at the US 30 interchange?

Ah, thank you for linking that page of the wiki. I was unaware of that particular bit of information.

Please be a little more careful with your edits. You've ended up gluing the nodes of many admin boundary ways to non-boundary features.
The iD editor gives you the option to hide boundary features while you edit, which would make this sort of thing easier to avoid.

I've not had much luck with partial reverts in JOSM. Looks like there are some other elements glued to the boundary ways, too. Might just be best to go through and manually correct the boundary with a good source. I've got a bunch of annexations I need to add over in Kendall, so I can try to take a look at it when I do that.

It appears that way/33764746 was shifted, I'm assuming by accident? Most of Plainfield's boundary is now in the wrong place.