Whitaker Way is tagged with `maxspeed=0`, which doesn't make much sense to me, what's the intended meaning?

A couple roads here have been created with maxspeed=0 set, was that intentional?

Of course I could be mistaken, as I have not looked into the objects histories in enough detail to know for sure, and the errors could have been introduced at the time of import, and your edits were simply unsuccessful attempts to fix the errors. But my point about iD not being up for the job of editing complex relations stands, as the errors remained.

I hope that makes sense, feel free to ask for clarification if I was unclear.

These forest boundaries are mapped as relations, complex ones at that. I don't use iD to edit much these days, but always found it hard to edit relations with iD. The relations you edited here had many errors, with things like inner ways outside of the outer ways, excessively complicated geometries, multipolygons as members of other multipolygons, and tags on member ways that duplicate the tags on the relations themselves.

This resulted in many areas of forest being mapped but failing to render, due to the errors. I think the errors were introduced by your edits. I've spent a bunch of time, and I think I've fixed the errors.

I'd recommend not trying to edit large relations with the iD editor. That is to say, editing large forests with iD is likely to make more problems than it solves.

While this user does not seem to be active anymore, I think it's worth noting that the addresses they added contained many errors, including all the ones on this block, and I have not found any of their changesets to have any source specified.

Nice! I just passed by this way today, for the first time since it opened.

It's useful to give a bit more context to what you have "added/fixed"? Your comment is not helpful to someone trying to understand what you have changed

Your edits on Pacific Central Station have been reverted as the names of the bus bays you changed are incorrect too.

Just beat me to it.

I was unsure about trusting the note from the other OSM editor, so I checked the addresses in person today, and they are correct.

Thanks, looks good.

Are these footpaths part of the final development, or temporary paths in use during construction?

It's probably better to try to avoid changesets that are half the width of the western hemisphere.

Thanks Sanjana, for letting me know a bit more about the process of what's going on behind the doors in the company you work for.

The road was closed to all motor vehicles the day I retagged it as a bike lane, or the day before. There are temporary barriers in place, and signage prohibiting all traffic other than bicycles. Your gps data from drivers either predates that closure, or it is from drivers ignoring the closure. We have had issues with drivers (some may be Lyft drivers) ignoring the restriction, and shoving their cars down the narrow section left open to bicycles. It's dangerous and unwelcome.

Part of the reason for this may be that the maps are telling them to go that way, and it is common for people to follow gps instructions, even when it is illegal.

I think it would be more appropriate to start by making a comment on the changeset done by a local, if it contradicts the info you have available, and ask about the change, before just reverting the changeset from afar.

Local mappers have been very active at keeping the real world changes related to the Skytrain construction (our local metro) up to date on OSM. Often when I see something new in this neighbourhood I'll find another OSM mapper has updated the map the same day it happens, before I can edit the map. The Lyft mappers seem to be forgetting that their info is not as current as local mappers. Please just ask before reverting other people's work.

There will be more changes as the SkyTrain extension continues.

This edit changed the tagging of this section of Ontario St, that I had done, with my source being specified as "local knowledge". Whatever unspecified "Lyft owned source" is being used in this changeset, it is out of date. There have been a bunch of real life changes to this neighbourhood made about 1 month ago, with others like this section of Ontario being more recent. They are expected to be in place for a total of 4 months.

I consider edits like this, where remote mappers make changes based on private data, and revert changes done by local data, to be vandalism, and Lyft should stop with this unacceptable behaviour.

This is not the first time that Lyft editors have done vandalism like this.

I've retagged it as `access=no` and `bus=yes`, but I think this is less clear than simply calling it a busway. I also fixed the turn restriction that you had broken.

I'd like to give you a chance to respond, but it is unwise to have this mapped as if it is publicly accessible. Why do you think `busway` is inappropriate for the connection between Main Street northbound and E 8th, when it is only accessible to buses?

It would be helpful if you added source tags to your changesets. You can see I've tagged my changeset source as "Survey".

This road is only accessible to buses.

I've been past a few times since the block of Broadway closed, and there's always been not just signage in place prohibiting private cars from turning left from Main Street to 8th, but also a police officer in place to ensure compliance with this. At a bare minimum the section of 8th connecting the north and south bound parts of Main Street should be tagged `access=no` and `bus=yes`, but that sounds a lot like a busway to me, even if it's unusually short.

In your opinion why is this not a busway? Are you just thinking about historial use? The fact that the block of Broadway will be closed for at least 4 months makes it worthwhile to map the changes.

I checked again today, and the left turn lane that connects with 8th is still only accessible to buses, and a police officer is on site to ensure the turn restriction is followed. I believe keeping this as a busway is appropriate.

I've fixed the 8th and Quebec re-routing that this edit broke. I think it would be helpful for foreign mappers to be more cautious about assuming that local mappers are wrong, based solely on imagery, especially imagery that is not publicly accessible.

Currently all traffic from Quebec is routed onto 8th, and vice versa. There are large concrete barriers separating the traffic, so mapping as separate ways is appropriate.

This will be in place for at least 4 months, and it is getting plenty of attention from local mappers, so I do not expect there to be any problem with it being updated as the SkyTrain construction continues.

Can you confirm that the stairs have been removed in reality, not just public access prohibited?