please consider tagging the feature as accurately as possible, if it's a multiuse path, path is more correct than footway or cycleway with appropriate access tags for foot or bicycle, etc.

the use of the data by downstream data consumers should be addressed with the downstream app developers rather than changing the data in OSM to fit a particular data consumer.

keep up the good work, always good to see new mappers in the area
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/90209315

Hi, This change caused multiple features to be deleted. For now I have reverted these changes, Please ensure that your edits to not unnecessarily delete features that still exist.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89703643

please consider using an existing tag such as operator=Virginia Beach Public Schools rather than creating a one-off tag this will maintain consistency with the map tagging and allow you to query based on the school system
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89760515

please consider using an existing tag such as operator=Virginia Beach Public Schools rather than creating a one-off tag this will maintain consistency with the map tagging and allow you to query based on the school system
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89760471

PS, good work, and keep it up, always nice to have someone new helping to improve the quality of the map!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89485589

in that case private is the correct semantics as I understand them. Private = only those with permission allowed. for things like government where only official staff are allowed, never general public, access=no
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89485589

not all privately owned roads should be marked private, some should be marked permissive if they are open to the public but privately maintained (think mall ring road/shopping centers. etc)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89485589

Hi, looks like some residential areas were deleted around Chesapeake City park, has the landuse changed?
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89480486

Hi, It looks like the residential area: www.openstreetmap.org/way/384954924
got deleted. is this correct or a mistake?
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89448940

curious why the deletion of residential areas?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89438710

Andre68 fixed my error in osm.org/changeset/89072035
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/88904800

Yep, I need to brush up on Overpass recursion so i download glued ways, Should be fixed by osm.org/changeset/88863367
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/88837894

Can you check the tags on the way enclosing the property?
It's tagged as building=yes where it should probably be landuse=commercial
osm.org/way/816706791
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86745746

This changeset was not part of an import.
It's been a year since this Changeset, I may or may not have imported a portion of the waterway=* paths that were added, but the bulk of the datapoints were hand-traced from imagery. The metadata for the waterway=* was referenced from NHD dataset as a source for GNIS data and classification codes.

I've read the referenced pages, As to if there's anything missing/wrong? I am not an authority on any of that so I don't know. If you have advice/guidance on tagging, that is more than welcome. If current guidance is to remove nhd tags, then I don't have any arguments against.

okay... Just a FYI, footpath on top of a pier that's drawn as an area is a valid mapping method, and enables pedestrian routing. It may not be super important on a restricted setting such as a military/coast guard installation, but deleting them without good reason isn't sound practice.

Thanks for updating the information about what is/is not floating as that is not information that's 100% verifiable from aerial photography.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86598468

Hi, I noticed you deleted a bunch of the footways on the piers at the Coast Guard base. Have the piers changed?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86598468

please make sure your amenity you're adding is placed in the correct position

rather than creating new keys, it appears that the "operator" tag would fulfill your needs of ensuring that the schools are queryable.
standard practice is to fully spell out names rather than abreviate, so tagging the school amenitys as "operator = Virginia Beach Public Schools" would be appropiate.

also, queries can be specified for case (in)sensitivity, so capitalization shouldn't be a problem for visibility in queries.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/73154432

thanks for the catch of my error. It should be corrected with: osm.org/changeset/72746043
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/72657807

Welcome new mapper, glad to see you diving in and contributing to improving the map!

Please note hashtags are not appropriate for building names.

Keep up the great work.