Hello,
I am reaching out in regards to some of the edits in this changeset. While I understand the thought behind the edits, the consolidation of the footway and cycleways seems to cause some confusion and is a regression of data (see ways 1352425140 and 385650099 for example). The existing paint indicates that the cycleway and pedestrian footways are separate lanes and should be treated independently. It seems that updating the tagging on the ways would be more beneficial than consolidating them. Just looking for some further explanation. Thanks. Casey (VLD192)

Hello 022,

Hope you are doing well. I have a question about some of the edits in changeset/179059302. Changing crossing tags from crossing=unmarked to crossing=uncontrolled seems inaccurate. See ways way/1421893310 and way/1424497603 for example.

The crossing=uncontrolled (crossing=uncontrolled?uselang=en) tag indicates that there are crossing markings present, and I cannot find any evidence that crossing markings exist at some of these locations. Please let me know if I am missing something and I look forward to hearing from you.
Thanks,
Casey (VLD192)

Hello,

I am reaching out regarding some of the edits made in this changeset. Adding crossing tags to footway/footway crossings seems to go against OSM standards. Crossing nodes should be used where two paths intended for different modes of transportation cross each other. osm.wiki/Crossings.

See nodes node/12304820247 and node/12304820257 for examples. I feel that a barrier=kerb (barrier=kerb) node would be more appropriate at these locations.

The issue seems to be widespread in the area and any clarification would be appreciated.
Thanks and I look forward to hearing from you.
VLD192 (Casey)

Hello,

I am reaching out regarding some edits made in this changeset. While I understand the name tag updates, the removal of the crossing data seems to be a regression. See way/1088318384/history, way/1136328446/history, and way/1297040325/history, for examples.

I have noticed similar edits in changesets changeset/175410091 and changeset/175413456. Any clarification would be appreciated and I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks.
Casey (VLD192)

Hello,
Thank you for the heads up, and thanks for making the fix. Much appreciated.
Casey (VLD192)

Hello. You are correct. I do not see any traffic signals either. Thank you for pointing this out and I will go ahead and update the tags. Thanks again. Casey (VLD192)

Hello angolasandy.
Thanks for reaching out regarding my updates to the farm name. I was not aware of the naming conventions in the area and will keep this in mind when editing in the future. Thanks again and feel free to reach out if you have any questions. Casey

Hello Duja,
Thanks for reaching out and I see your point regarding my edits. I will take your comments into consideration when mapping moving forward. Feel free to reach out with questions and thanks again.
VLD192

Hello John Hanover,
Thank you for reaching out regarding the recent edits in the Aleutian Islands made by our editors. The edits were made to resolve a series of invalid crossings on the coastlines and to close an open relation in the area. It was not our intention to harm the map in any way and I apologize for the issues that our edits may have caused. I will investigate the issues that you have brought up and will address them accordingly. Thank you for bringing this to my attention and feel free to reach out with any questions.
Thanks,
VLD192

Hello literan,
Thanks for reaching out regarding changeset #145016805. My edits were made to close a gap in the multipolygon and the tag update was unintentional. Thank you for pointing this out and making the correction. Feel free to reach out if you have any other questions.
VLD192