Hey Nate, we probably shouldn't have the relation for 505 relation/72295 as public_transport:version=2 since that requires (? or at least is very usually done with) a separate relation for each travel direction

I must say it is somewhat ironic to see for example this shelter way/678164480 not having square angles ;)

Q key in JOSM is your friend

Hello,

Would you happen to know if the Umajin Toronto office still exists on Fort York Boulevard?

Sorry, this is "tagging for the router". See osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer : "Don't deliberately enter data incorrectly".

From imagery, way/34366551 connects to the road. So then connect the path to the road and use crossing=no on the intersection of path and road that can be used to indicate that crossing is not allowed.

But tag the sidewalk properly or don't have it at all.

BTW, tagging it as a path to suggest it can be cycled on also makes cycling directions less useful since instead of specifying "ride on Manning Road" it will say "ride along this nameless path".

Why? It seems a sidewalk to me

Okay, I hope I got the left restriction right as relation/9407368 in changeset/68263699

I also opened an issue in OpenRouteService https://github.com/GIScience/openrouteservice/issues/467 as it seems it also has similar issues with very sharp lefts elsewhere.

Thanks again for reporting and adding information!

Thanks for adding these. I'm not entirely sure, but we _might_ also need to encode a no_left_turn from way/239208188 to way/236565624 as that's currently still "legal" and as far as I can see it is what https://maps.openrouteservice.org/directions?n1=46.429916&n2=-80.998587&n3=17&a=46.433539,-81.035328,46.450351,-81.003549&b=0&c=0&k1=en-US&k2=km does (note that its "sharp left" is indicated before the eastbound on-ramp joins in).

I think that restriction will require splitting the ways, and that might be difficult to do in iD (though I've not kept up with iD's capabilities these days). If you can't see a way to do it let me know and I'll try to do it in another editor.

Thanks again,
--Jarek

Hi, thanks for your updates to the rail lines around here. I noticed that south of Hagersville there are still some bits left over as "SOR", in particular in relation/7414399. Is that intended, or an oversight?

Ah it's because I changed membership of way/76559091 in 504A relation/7904594/history from undefined to "forward". Derp.

Why is the bounding box so big towards the east? https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=68027514 confirms I didn't change anything east of Shaw...

Sorry, w changeset/67906992

Cześć,

nie możemy dać amenity=place_of_worship, ponieważ jest to dawny kościół. Tu już nie ma place_of_worship (świątyni, miejsca kultu, Andachtstätte). W node/6324083209 zmieniłem na disused:amenity=place_of_worship. Dodałem naprawdę dużo danych do way/269446404

For comparison, London, England relation/65606 which similarly doesn't really fit into UK's administrative structure has only one admin_centre with place=city

Hello,

What is the intended meaning of "Toronto (city)" label node/6182594235, and what is the meaning of its position just off Bridle Path? Why is it place=county while the Toronto admin_centre is place=city?

The Toronto relation relation/324211 now has an admin_centre as well as the label, it seems that default OpenStreetMap.org render the admin_centre, but the label comes up in searches. See note/1697520 for one such question. Does the separate label node serve a purpose I am not familiar with?

It seems that Hamilton has the exact same situation as well.

Hi DK28082,

Thanks for your updates here. You added name "60 Avenue" to way/297362491. A note has been created note/1568353 saying that this isn't a name, and the road is just a nameless parking access road. Could you doublecheck and confirm which is correct?

changed "Ninth" to "9th" because I browsed to the intersection from the north, and it's all spelled "9th" north of here.

I see that south of here it's all "Ninth", I don't know which is actually correct and this edit isn't meant to an indication of correctness one way or another

Cheers, thanks for checking on this.

Awesome, thanks again for keeping this up to date.

Thank you for keeping up with this project. Much appreciated. Just to double check, are way/435698679 and way/139270736 still access=no, or is that an oversight?

Only south side of Queen was updated, I didn't survey the north side