Hello Sylvia,

Your reclassification of a number of roads in downtown Calgary is incorrect. Please review highway=* and osm.wiki/Calgary#Road_tagging_guidelines for more information, and please desist making more of these changes until you have had a chance to more thoroughly review what these classifications actually mean.

Please note that if you are unsure about your changes you can mark them for review by more experienced contributors by clicking the "I would like someone to review my edits" checkbox.

Thanks!

Hi Laura,

Just a heads up: you don't need to add nodes like this to add information about the Girls' School: information like the address and website was already tagged in the 'area' of the school campus. Similarly for the church across the street, the 'area' of the building was already tagged.

In fact you *shouldn't* add these nodes, because then it will duplicate the information. A third-party software that uses OSM for its map data will see two sets of data for each of these things, and will unnecessarily duplicate it.

Hi Pedro,

Best practice is to NOT use the name to tag an object on the map with its use, or a description of its use. See osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only. So, if this particular body of water had a name, say it was well-known as "Golden Pond", then and only then would we put a name to it.

I see this lots, for example on sidewalks and paths that have a name of "sidewalk". You don't need to call a sidewalk "sidewalk", we know it's a sidewalk from the tags.

I've changed the tagging of this 'pond' to a 'retention basin' instead. See basin=retention. I added a description, saying it's a stormwater retention pond and that swimming is not permitted.

See https://www.calgary.ca/content/dam/www/corporate-communications/locations/bowmont-off-leash.pdf

Well that's embarrassing... The link to the park layout is at https://www.calgary.ca/content/dam/www/csps/recreation/documents/athletic-parks/foothills-athletic-park-map.pdf...

Well according to the change history you've done it twice. You changed it in changeset/91568557, I changed it back the next day in 91593786, and you changed it back in this one, 91888314...

Hi 0b0e. I have reverted your changes to the SW BRT once again. Please stop tagging that road as a bus guideway. It is *not* a bus guideway, it's just a regular road that happens to be accessible only to buses.

Please read highway=bus%20guideway to understand the differences. A bus guideway is a road wherein the buses are steered by external means, e.g. a track or special curbs. This road is simply a two-lane, bus-only road where the bus drivers must operate the buses as normal, so it is properly tagged as highway=service, access=no, bus=designated.

Please desist from changing it back to highway=bus_guideway.

I have reverted these changes. The SW BRT is not a bus guideway, please read highway=bus%20guideway to understand the differences. A bus guideway is a road wherein the buses are steered by external means, e.g. a track or special curbs. This road is simply a two-lane, bus-only road where the bus drivers must operate the buses as normal.

And with respect to the 'merge point' west of here: eh, even if it's not at precisely the right spot it's close enough, it won't affect the accuracy of the traffic movement in any meaningful way.

Never mind, I was trying to work backward through the edit history in this area; I thought you'd blown away the north side of the intersection, not changeset/91391439. I can absolutely, positively, 100% confirm that the bridge was NOT open as recent as Tuesday evening, no matter what the traffic advisory said.

This will all be open shortly so at this point putting it back the way it was is moot. I'm just annoyed (not at you) that people with itchy trigger fingers jumped the gun on this. I added a note (note/2060528) stating that the at-grade intersection was temporary, in the misguided hope that people would leave it alone until the completed, final road alignment actually opened...

*sigh*

I drove through about half an hour ago: the bridge isn't open, the at-grade intersection is still there...

You have deleted the temporary at-grade intersection at 69 St & Stoney Trail and have changed tags along the Stoney Trail alignment from "highway=construction" to "highway=motorway" without deleting the "construction=*" tags.

Can you corroborate that the new bridge at 69 St is actually open? According to the project website it won't be until Oct 1 (see http://www.swcrrproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SWCRR-Traffic-Advisory-Discovery-Ridge-Boulevard-Roadway-Alignment-Change-September-20-2020.pdf), and from personal experience four days ago (Sep 21) it isn't open yet.

If you can't, can you please roll back these changes? The road will be done *soon*, but the map shouldn't be updated until it is actually open.

Thanks

Hi there, I deleted the two features you added here. You added historic *pillories*, not *pillars*. A pillory is a lockable frame with holes for a person's head and hands, used to punish and humiliate people long ago. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillory)

I've modified the geometry of the Chinook Centre building to encompass the detail of the pillars. I think that should suffice for showing the detail of the building's shape.

An as a reminder, please don't use the "name" tag to describe a feature on the map. Some very prominent—usually historic—building features have names, but generally they don't. You can tag things with "description" instead.

Cheers

FYI the "official name" tag is used where a more common name is the one is typically used. It's not actually very common to need to tag something with "official_name=*".

Road names in Calgary should be "<Name> <Road type> <QD>", where 'QD' is the quadrant abbreviated to two letters. E.g. this road actually is named Edworthy Street, not Patrick Avenue (no idea where that came from), so the name as it should appear in the tag is "Edworthy Street SW". (I've already made this change.)

:)

FYI I have removed the "old name" tag from Battalion Park. I think you may have misinterpreted the wikipedia article about this park. The soldiers who hauled the rocks and deposited them on the hillside here trained at Camp Sarcee, but Camp Sarcee (or "Sarcee Camp") was not here: it was located southeast, roughly where the Grey Eagle Casino is now. The camp eventually became Sarcee Barracks, later Harvey Barracks (part of CFB Calgary), before being returned to the Tsuut'ina in 1998.

I have deleted the "building" and restored the parking aisles myself.

Please be more careful in future about simply tracing from satellite imagery.

Hi Ido Marom. With this changeset you have deleted several parking aisles and replaced them with a new "building" (way/826183208) at 12th Ave & Macleod Tr SE. This "building" was merely a temporary tent that was set up on the site for about four weeks last summer. The tent no longer exists; the parking lot is still extant. Can you please revert these changes and put it back to the way you found it? Thanks in advance

Don't be shy, Frederik. After all you weren't helpful a year ago, so I see no reason why you should begin self-censoring your useless comments now. Quoted for posterity:

"If telling an experienced mapper not to call other projectmembers "useless gits" in public amounts to "alienating (that experienced mapper) with patronizing arrogance" then I think there is a perception problem.

Just because you're an experienced mapper doesn't mean you can't make mistakes, and if you make mistakes, it is normal for other - even less experienced! - people to make you aware of them. Trying to invoke seniority in such situations is a sign of weakness."

That you dredged this up and swiftly deleted it goes to show that you're completely oblivious. It was never about someone trying to "make me aware of my mistakes", it was about Rodrigo Hausen being a petty jerk because I dared to question his destructive changes elsewhere in the first place. He wasn't trying to be helpful, he was trying to find any perceived mistake he could and add fixme tags (see changeset/68003404) in order to exact some sort of retribution for deigning to question him. You were oblivious to this then, and are still oblivious now.

More than that I think what bothers me most is your closing line, "... reviving it now doesn't help anyone. Sorry." Save your insincere "sorry" for some so who'll believe it. You're not sorry for what you said—you're not apologetic for being a massive hypocrite and calling me "weak"—you're only sorry that you didn't notice how old the comment string was. You're only sorry you made yourself look like a fool.

I stand by what I said before: you are pompous and arrogant. I just hope you'll learn to correct this mistake in the way you interact with people. It is normal for other people such as myself to make you aware of your mistakes.

Hi there, N_A_P. In order to tag road segments as bus-only you can add a bus=designated tag to it. Land use tags should only be used on areas, not ways, which is why your changeset has a "mismatched geometry: area as line" warning. Otherwise your tagging looks good!

I did however delete the maxspeed=20 tag though; are you sure this actually has a posted 20 km/h speed limit? I don't recall it having any posted speed limit.

Your changesets 808850608 and 85845160 have also screwed things up. the bike path had been realigned in 2018. *sigh*

Can you please revert your changes?