I don't believe the changes you made to Apache Trail are accurate and could cause serious problems.

The section east of the overlook is single lane width in several very dangerous areas. It is nowhere near a "Minor/Unclassified Highway".

Track Road from the overlook east to the turnoff for the Apache Lake Marina is what I believe is the best designation for that road based on its width.

Sure, it is smooth so a track with a grade of 2 is appropriate, but it is certainly not a wide two-lane road.

I see some odd tagging happening along the Pinhoti trail relation. Seems like tags for the relation were applied to the highway ways (like a distance tag). There was a road walk section where the road was a residential highway tagged with motorcycle=no (yet cars could still use it).

I'm not super experienced with relations and tagging them, but it seems off to me. Especially where the Pinhoti Trail has road walks and the roads are being tagged as if they're paths.

Thanks, missed that one. Fixed it.

BTW, I just saw in the news that a good chunk of that area is going to be closed and turned into a recreation site. I need to head out and figure out the extent of the closure and mark those trails as closed now.

Bunch of wasted work. It'll probably get revegetated and those tracks will be gone in a couple years.

Are you sure this node
node/1450157774
Is really a monument? On the topo maps it says monument there, but that is part of a "Monument Boundary" line on the topo map. An old boundary for the Death Valley National Monument before those mining areas were absorbed into the national monument.

That aircraft out at East Jesus is more of a display than a wreck. I think the tagging historic=aircraft plus tourism=attraction combination might me more appropriate.

It's intentionally put there on display.

I don't see a gate added in this on along the way. I do see that you set an entire stretch of road as private.

Were you able to confirm at both ends that there's a gate? Did you forget to add the gates?

Thanks for making it better. I had gone out with a friend and he used his GPS and sent me the GPX file for it. Not sure why it was off.

Thanks, found a few more I found in a couple other changesets I did. Thanks, getting those cleaned up too.

Thanks for checking out my edit and providing feedback.

Filed a ticket with RideWithGPS.com for them to either track a bug on their router (if they made their own router) or provide me with the information for which routing engine they're using so I can notify them of a bug in their routing engine.

It's a combination of both a tagging and a routing problem.

Tagging these things as barriers is kind of over zealous when the only thing they're a barrier to is a cow. They really don't impede the movement of any traffic on the highway or track they're placed on. They really just go "Brrrrrt" as you fly over them.

For routing engines it's fair for them to think that a node tagged as a "barrier" on a highway is a barrier to the flow on that highway.

I do agree though that if a routing engine has a problem with this tag that they should also attempt to fix it, but us contributors also bear some of the responsibility to accurately describe features and barriers with tagging.

I've run into this problem on more than one router previously. I'll file a bug report with the router I noticed it on yesterday and and try to find the others that had problems.

I still think the explicit access tagging should remain though. From my research the addition of simply the "motor_vehicle=yes" tag is sufficient to describe the cattle_grid barriers on highways properly.

Congratulations for having the 1 millionth change set.

Phew, thanks. I got those removed. Accidentally added them when I was doing a comparison to planned vs actual installations. Normally I set the layer to "discourage upload" but missed it.