Do you think you could please add unit numbers for the businesses at 130 Second Avenue West?

You broke way #651372392.

Yeah, I had been noticing random lines in the map data on Vancouver Island in OSM-Carto, and had suspected something like this was occurring. Thank you for keeping on the ball with this.

Why have you created "roadways" that apparently stretch all the way around the world, including over oceans?

Go for it.

Source tag is incorrect. Actual source is Bing and ESRI World aerial imagery.

Thank you so much for this! I am trying to cover the rest of Vancouver Island with woodland data, and this is a big help.

FWIW, many models of GPS receivers do have built-in atmospheric pressure sensors to improve elevation accuracy. You simply need to calibrate them at a location where you know for sure how high above sea level you are.

Well, I cannot exactly provide GPS readings for summits, because it is nowhere near feasible for me to travel to any of them. And I have found inaccuracies in SRTM data, particularly near coastlines.

If you removed the "ele" tag from some of these nodes because they are not actually peaks, those nodes should be tagged as "natural"="ridge" or "natural"="mountain_range" instead of "natural"="peak".

In that case, I have added a map to the Wikipedia article for the Vancouver Island Trail. That should suffice.

https://natural-resources.canada.ca/science-and-data/science-and-research/earth-sciences/geography/topographic-information/web-services/elevation-api/17328

Why is there a ford on this residential street? Is it permanently flooded?

That would be a good idea. I do not know why ridges were tagged as peaks in the first place.

If you are talking about all of the bodies of water relations I added, you should note that two of the reasons I put those in was for the benefit of the OpenSeaMap project and of users of Garmin devices. I would ask that you leave all of those relations untouched, and try to find a suitable compromise between your desire for more efficient relations and my desire to maintain this toponymic schema.

What I think we should do instead is draw the boundary of the Eeyou Marine Region as outlined in this document. https://www.gov.nu.ca/sites/default/files/files/017%2520-%2520Eeyour%2520Marine%2520Region%2520Land%2520Claims%2520Agreement%2520(EMRLCA).pdf

Irrelevant. First Nation lands can transcend provincial and territorial boundaries, and such boundaries would have no bearing on First Nation activities in the area. But the Quebec Boundaries Extension Act of 1912 puts the Quebec-Nunavut boundary *exactly* on Quebec's mainland shoreline.

*All* islands in Hudson and James Bays belong to Nunavut, without exception. The boundary between Quebec and Nunavut must coincide with the mainland shoreline.

Ingilraniq is a strait, meant to be the entrance into Ingniqhiurvik, which is why I gave those two bodies of seawater those specific area definitions.

And the Inuvialuit Lands are meant to coincide with the coastline here. I only gave some of those ways the "natural=coastline" tag where they were more accurate than the data sourced from PGS.

In this case, it should really be just "Port Moody". http://www4.nrcan.gc.ca/search-place-names/unique/JAMQU