In https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys I only see 2 instances of keys with "unsigned_ref:" prefix, which is unsigned_ref:left and unsigned_ref:right. Can you help me understand why unsigned_ref:US:eff is better than source:eff_ref (since they both seem like they'll be new keys to OSM)?

Again thank you. I'll start work on updating the tags for these nodes.

The "TowerX" value is not present on the mast and I believe it is just an identifier used by the EFF for these deployments, so from your comment it seems like I should use unsigned_ref:US:eff=*. To correct these nodes, would you suggest I update the attribute tag to be "source=*" and then also use "source:unsigned_ref:US:eff=*" or simply use the top level unsigned_ref key like "unsigned_ref:US:eff=*"? The intention of source:eff_ref was to specify what identifier in the original dataset references this node so it can be validated and/or updated if the location or attributes of the deployment ever changes.

Hi, thank you for helping me figure this out. I have tried to look on the wiki for the appropriate tag for referencing a key on a source dataset and came across https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source%3Aprow_ref, https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source%3Ahighway_authority_ref,https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source%3Areg_ref, https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source%3Aunsigned_ref, etc which seems to differentiate between a broader uniqueness requirement and something narrowly scoped to the source material. I was worried source:ref=• should have a value that links to the source data and not specify the unique id of the node in the source.

Is here the best place to discuss this or should I bring it up in the osm tagging slack channel?

Thank you for the comment!
I don't remember removing those so I am guessing I did something silly in the tool. I'll add them back in now, and change the building=yes to building=church for these.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161217146