Hello, can you elaborate on what kind of sources, guidelines, or local knowledge you used to change the classification of this road?

Thank you for your work sorting out the mess here! I have also seen bad edits from that editor unfortunately. Thanks for your efforts.

oops, sorry for the large bounding box, i didn't notice i also dragged the one node in Oakville

Hello,

Your edits have introduced a sidewalk discontinuity at node/13118744827, right outside Dixie station. Can you please resolve this?

Hello,

Your edits have introduced a sidewalk discontinuity at node/13115677276, at the crossing of Crestlawn Drive. Can you please resolve this?

Hello,

You have updated properties of public transport stops in Germany changeset/173850855 , housenumbers in Morocco changeset/173851006 , and speed limits in Mexico changeset/173851114 , all within a couple of hours of each other, using StreetComplete.

StreetComplete is intended for surveying in-person, in the area where you are physically located. Were you in all three places today? Or are your updates delayed somehow?

I see that you have undone the change to node/5313955962 -- thank you -- but just a request to remember to check OSM history when imagery doesn't match what's tagged, to see if the tagged value is from survey -- especially when imagery suggests a worse level of infra than what's tagged.

The receipt also confirmed that the address is 9 Queens Quay West, as changed previously (in version 6 of the relation)

Source of these changes is survey, as in I was standing there today and making those changes in Every Door

(Just making the note for clarity, since in changeset/166896706 I made the crossings at Frankish Avenue have markings=lines. They are lines on imagery, but repainted to ladder in real life now.)

Quoting the first paragraph of highway=pedestrian :

"A highway=pedestrian is a road or area designated mainly or exclusively for pedestrians. Often found in shopping areas, town centres, places with tourism attractions and recreation/civic areas, where wide expanses of hard surface are provided for pedestrians to walk. [...] Vehicle traffic is generally restricted, with possible exceptions for taxi and delivery services. Cyclists may or may not be permitted, as can be specified by bicycle=*. "

All of this applies to the ways I've changed here. Pedestrians are the primary road users, by design and in practice. Bicycles are allowed and there's a fair amount of them, hence bicycle=yes, but due to the amount of pedestrians to be navigated around, it's not really an MUP that would be used for exercise or commuting (hence why I retagged the part south of the bridge that was previously a cycleway). Motor vehicles are limited to maintenance vehicles.

Some of the other paths on the island could arguably be changed to pedestrian too (e.g. Lakeshore Avenue close to the pier), but this one is particularly clear example.

BTW I saw that two different capitalizations were used for Avenue of the Islands and JOSM warned me about them, but I don't know which one is right so I didn't change that.

I'm not sure off the top of my head. Sorry that I missed the one on the north side when updating!

I'd guess so from imagery: Bing and Esri in Toronto are older and show a dock only on north side, Mapbox and the City ortho imagery show a dock only on the south side. But I can try to pass by and verify maybe this week.

(this has now been corrected by lastcommodore in changeset/169736480 )

sent DM to lastcommodore just now asking if they'll fix it

Oh, this one didn't do parking tags, because I wasn't entirely sure about them

Hey, way/1414000295 still has access=private here, I'm assuming that's an error?

So I think there's two questions:

- What was meant in your edit?
- What should be tagged in OSM?

An OpenStreetMap preset project has included "City of Toronto" and Q172 when a park operator is entered as something like "City of Toronto" since 2022:

https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/commit/94b011c05ef797394d6d1fabc284baab9425eeea#diff-c595cdb591d97a91e00711537f90e3c1b3418df99ffab545e5a6a66ed65ed1eeR2111

These tags will gradually roll out to Toronto parks as they are edited in OSM and the presets are accepted by editors. Some of the parks are already tagged, e.g. way/9153060

Specifying operator=City of Toronto and not:wikidata:operator=Q172 means, in OSM speak, that the operator is the City of Toronto, but it's not the same City of Toronto as indicated by https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q172 (which is Wikidata for "Toronto"). Possibly this happened by mistake or misunderstanding here. But that's why I asked.

If it's a standard city park, the resolution is likely to change the tag not:wikidata:operator=Q172 to wikidata:operator=Q172

Hey, this edit mapped the park as operator=City of Toronto and not:operator:wikidata=Q172, where Q172 is the Wikidata entry for Toronto. So is the park operated by the City or not? Or did you mean that the operator is the municipal government Toronto rather than the general "Toronto city"?

Or if based on your survey these are not suitable or allowed for bicycle use, can you discuss with DaveTO in one of those changesets, like changeset/135488466 ?

Did you see the changeset comments when they were created?

"The sidewalks on Allen Rd between Sheppard Ave and Transit Rd are asphalt, clearly meant to act as a multiuse pathway or as a protected bike lane. Thus, I am tagging them as paths so that navigation apps can take advantage of them. " way/1166193150/history/2

" Based on street-level photos, it is apparent that the asphalt "sidewalks" alongside Allen Rd between Sheppard Ave and Transit Rd are meant to act as one-way multiuse paths shared by cyclists and pedestrians. Allen Rd itself allows bikes until Transit Rd. " way/1166193150/history/3

You changed them to sidewalk tagging but that excludes bicycles again

Ah I see now that the access=yes tag is newer, thanks.

... although all roads leading to here are access=private... ah well