Can you link to "Meadow Pond"? I can't find it. I will check the signage on Anthem Way next time I go by.

OSM has a confused doctrine, visible on the ground out of one side of its mouth, and a strong focus on the English "public rights of way" out of the other. In the US (at least in MA), public rights of way are verifiable at the registry of deeds. So I think access tags should follow what the actual legal situation is. OSM also has a tradition of tagging signs, representing exactly what the sign said, whether or not what is on it is true, and whether the person who put it up is acting properly or not.

The case of Anthem Way is curious, and I'll follow up with the Acton Planning board. It could be that L3 is wrong here, and it's easy enough to request the subdivision plan, special permit, or comprehensive permit as those are all public records.

In this case, the Ridgewood and Westview in Stow are shown as carved out from the condo property.

Thanks for working on this. I had a note to fix Regency, and am glad you did. To figure out if a road is a "real road", which in MA means either a "public way" or a "private way" (easement for the public to pass, but is not necessarily maintained by the government) or something "not a road" such as a driveway, the best resource is "L3 Parcels" or "Tax Parcels" which shows legal roads as carved out spaces.

It looks like you moved a bunch of nodes when you added the wikidata tag. Is that what you think happened, and If so I wonder why?

I just noticed this (adding the cell antenna), and "residential" seemed wrong, as L3 Parcels show it not as a legal street. So I have changed it to service. The change to residential was long ago, in a huge changeset, with a gibberish comment, referencing Bing -- which makes no sense.

Can you explain the name? Is there a road name? Is this way used for anything other than water/cell-tower access?

Is there a gate? Surely this is locked and access private but that's "surely" not seeing it on the ground.

Not objecting, but this looks like a large-scale edit and I wonder where it was discussed. I didn't see anything on the talk-us-massachusetts mailinglist.

Are you local to MA?

please don't delete landuse=conservation. That is actually a valid tag, despite the wiki wrongly claiming deprecation.

See changeset/169394298

See changeset/169394298

For clarification: MassGIS publishes town corner coordinates from a professional survey. I have also measured them, with less than professional equipment. So far my judgement is that for my previous measurements, the state's coordinates are more reliable, but my current measurements might be similar. Thus, I have aligned the boundary to the state's coordinates (transformed to ITRF2014). Also, I put the historic boundary stone at my measurement -- which is only 1m away. This is a compromise and shows the uncertainty, and that's what seems useful to me, the active local. Feel free to message me if you are also local and think it should be different, or to bring it up on the MA email list.

I've made the edit. Happy to discuss if you'd like

name dropped, nevermind

In josm, building=retail is appearing as if mistagged, and retail isn't a value in the wiki, despite being mentioned in the text of commercial. Plus, hairdresser is primarily service vs goods, so I would suggest building=commercial. Is that ok with you?

This is a bench with name=Amenity. I didn't see any bench names today. ok to assume that's a mistake in tagging and clean it up?

I see you have deleted your account, so will edit away....

Not saying it wasn't there then, but today eastern bank was NOT here, there was construction and signs that Chase was coming soon. also didn't see sweet thyme.

I think this should be reverted, and a fixme="probably stream; needs field checking" tag, or some such added. It seems 99% likely that someone was intending to add a stream and made an error.

Why do you think it is ok to just delete, rather than comment on the original changeset and ask? The point of OSM is to work together to improve the map database (and the surrounding infrastructure), and just deleting doesn't really fit that.

Have you noticed that a way you added, almost certainly a stream, but not tagged, was deleted by another user?

changeset/166510759

Did you see a no trespassing sign, or merely a small "private way" tag above the street name? In Massachusetts, "private ways" have an easement to the public, the same as "public ways". It is merely that maintenance responsibility differs. L3 parcels shows this as subject to a road easement -- which would have been necessary to obtain planning permission. So I think this private tagging is wrong and should be removed.