I think it is much better to use standard keys that are used worldwide such as designation=* instead of using invented local keys such as place:PH=*.

These were originally mapped as buildings until I pointed it out on Telegram.

Can you provide proof that long lengths of the SLEX extension is actually being constructed? You have marked the portion going towards Lucena as highway=construction. Unless the right-of-way has been fenced off and cleared, then I don't agree that highway=construction is the correct tag.

Oops. Changest comment should be: "[Alabang] CBTL is now open".

This changeset duplicated an amenity=school, several school buildings, and a road. I wonder what happened? Unsaved JOSM changes + internet problems?

Hi! It seems you accidentally changed a `place=town` tag into `place=Pampanga`, which is incorrect. I have now fixed this.

This changeset duplicated a lot of buildings, tracing/creating buildings that were already existing.

Please be careful when "reuploading" changesets. This particular changeset resulted in duplicated overlapping streets.

For now I'm using the OSM philosophy "any tag you want" to capture this information in OSM.

As for the location of the "place=town" node, we are already doing this. To illustrate, here is an Overpass Turbo query for the six poblacion barangays of the town of Balabac as well as Balabac's place node itself: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/WM3

As you can see, the "place=town" node is already placed at the "center" of the cluster of poblacion barangays, but there is no machine-readable way to indicate that the six barangays are designated as part of the town poblacion.

And to give a counter-example, here is the Overpass Turbo query for the single poblacion barangay of the city of Makati and Makati's "place=city" node": http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/WM4

As you can see this time, the "place=city" node is *outside* of the poblacion barangay. This is because Makati is the financial center of the Philippines and it is more appropriate to place the node at the "center" of the central business district instead of the original poblacion area which was the city's "center" during the Spanish and American colonial era.

Hi! I am uncomfortable using "capital=10" (barangays are at "admin_level=10") because there are plenty of cases where a set of 2 or more barangays are designated as part of the town's poblacion. For example, the town of Dolores has 4 barangays in its poblacion: https://psa.gov.ph/classification/psgc/?q=psgc/barangays/045615000

This situation is definitely not similar to the cases like that of South Africa which legally has multiple capitals (Bloemfontein, Cape Town, and Pretoria).

My general philosophy now is "as much as possible, mapping and tagging should follow the conventions set by the OpenStreetMap community as a whole" as stated on the page header here: osm.wiki/Philippines/Mapping_conventions

The name=* tag should be the common name and people do not really refer to purely numeric barangays by just the number alone. (Nobody really says, "I'm at 55" but would instead say, "I'm at Barangay 55".)

Hi! Sorry for the delayed response. This tag indicates that the barangay[1] is designated as the town's poblacion[2] or "center" by the national government. You can see this designation in the following page where the Talisoy barangay (in the table near the bottom of the page) has the "(Pob.)" suffix added: https://psa.gov.ph/classification/psgc/?q=psgc/barangays/045621000

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barangay
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poblacion

I disagree with the addition of a "tram" here. In OSM, trams have actual rails embedded into the road. It is not the case in Mall of Asia. At best, the trams here are just very specialized buses.

(@Joey Samson: will you please stop spamming changesets with your requests? Changeset comments are for discussing the edits within a changeset, not for off-topic requests.)

@Joey Samson. I am just a volunteer mapper. I am not paid to do any of these mapping. That means that I will map whatever I want whenever I feel like doing it.

Oops. Changeset comment is wrong. Correct changeset comment is:

[Cagayan] Extend municipal boundary relations to cover municipal waters; remove addr:province=* tag from boundary relations; add place=town nodes of coastal towns to boundary relations as role:admin_centre; add boundary tags to internal Cagayan town boundary ways

Hi! If I understand this changeset correctly, you replaced the previous boundary geometry for Sanchez Mira and Pamplona with the dataset from Project NOAH. However, the previous geometry included those municipalities' municipal waters which gives municipal governments jurisdiction over things like fishery rights.

Hi! I notice that you've been adding barangay boundaries but you are using Google Maps as your source.

Please see the following: osm.wiki/FAQ#Why_don.27t_you_just_use_Google_Maps.2Fwhoever_for_your_data.3F

Hi! I think in the process of adding the municipal boundaries you have moved the place=town nodes of several municipalities from their poblacions to the geographical center? Is this your actual intention? These nodes should be at the poblacion, preferably at or near the town plaza.

This changeset has been reverted by changeset/83944525. The former changeset removed a boundary relation.