Hi! Thanks for your contributions! Just so you're aware, abbreviating route ref modifiers is against the community norms for tagging route refs (see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/kevinajames95-currently-mangling-tags-along-route-66-and-bannered-routes-elsewhere/106723). Feel free to join that thread for discussion. Thanks again!

Hi! Thanks for your contributions! Just so you're aware, abbreviating route ref modifiers is against the community norms for tagging route refs (see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/kevinajames95-currently-mangling-tags-along-route-66-and-bannered-routes-elsewhere/106723). Feel free to join that thread for discussion. Thanks again!

Hi! Thanks for your contributions! Just so you're aware, abbreviating route ref modifiers is against the community norms for tagging route refs (see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/kevinajames95-currently-mangling-tags-along-route-66-and-bannered-routes-elsewhere/106723). Feel free to join that thread for discussion. Thanks again!

They opened the bike path? Gonna have to check that out when I'm back in town.

no, not at all, don't know where that came from to be honest

fixed

Feel like I'm opening a can of worms here, but is the Dakota name for Touch The Sky Prairie on any of the signs or official sources? If not it might be better to leave the Dakota name in the name:dak tag and keep the name tag in English (might as well add a name:en tag too).

changeset/10000!

Weird, must have slipped through the cracks, JOSM's been pretty good about giving me warnings when I miss one (these should be inholdings in the NF and there's a lot of them)

That was based on feedback from the OSM Americana group, essentially the idea was if it's more like a park where you can buy an annual pass it would be fee, but if you have to pay every time you use the road it would be toll. The distinction to me seems kinda flexible, but the way I'm conceptualizing it is that state parks, national parks, etc. would be fee and turnpikes/toll bridges would be toll.

Good to know, I'll get that updated. Someone had added the toll=yes tag to just the Devils Tower entry booth area so I just... extended it.

You're welcome! When I get a chance I'll split out the Wildlife Management Area

So I was looking at name=* and there was this line under the "do not use name=" section. "If a road has buildings along it with 'County Route 5' in their street address, its name is likely 'County Route 5'." To me, that indicates there should be a "North 56th Street" name here, but you're the local here so I won't push too hard for this.

I guess it depends where the access road for the data center will be, and how that construction will shake out. Another thing to consider is how the preferred editing software handles the tags, for instance adding addresses in iD is much less user-friendly without a name= tag. Maybe one of us should start a discussion on the wiki or the community forums so that the mixed messages shake out, as it seems the at least two of the most-used editors lean towards "everything needs a name= tag" while official name= policy is signed only.

So this is the name addresses use (go to https://tools.usps.com/zip-code-lookup.htm, type in "56th" and "68514"), should a road name not be put in the map because the local government won't put up a sign? I guess I added it in because so that it's in the OSM database, which other sources end up using for navigation. Maybe using this tag (name:signed=*) instead would work better, as then the name is in the database for other sites to use but the fact it isn't signed is still noted. Plus I swore I saw signage the last time I visited Lincoln but I could be misremembering.

I think you meant to add a node. Reverting back to S. Minnesota.

Should these be mapped as such, since they're only Census Bureau definitions and not actual civil boundaries? Maybe boundary=census for the unorganized territories?

Weird, iD must have duplicated all the Lake County edits I did (said I had unsaved changes when I guess I didn't), I'll check it over

FYI the right-angle alignment of 50 and 46 is the correct one (field-checked in 2021), I've changed it back but just letting you know so we don't get into an edit war over something that's just taking a while to update in certain imagery layers

good work young padawan