Usually it’s “Oh no a comment on open Street map what did I break this time?”
I don’t know why you’re looking at changes for a year ago but thanks for the awesome comment.

Sound fine to me, I just have to remember this the next time I find myself mapping churches.

This conversation is probably worth capturing the arguments on in the talk for the wiki or on the wiki guidance for the church tagging as I don’t know that I would have looked at the land use page. Makes me wonder if there are any tools for schema style checking or recommendations.
TLDR I’m good with you recommendation and will try to remember this, but might not so feel free to remind me if I break something you have fixed in the future.

From a programmatic standpoint it doesn’t matter much as if when the map is fixed searching for areas containing building and updating tags in mass is possible

I would imaging that in terms of prevalence that there are more marked buildings than areas which is to say church’s that don’t yet have an associated area either because it is not yet mapped or because the church has not grounds and is a building in a different area type.

That argument would also be in favor of marking the building and not the area with denomination if both exist.

I personally have just accepted the double symbols as less than ideal and a render bug. But if I had to choose I would drop the denomination sect info from the area to favor the most specific entity having the details.
It tough. From map guidance perspective finding the building is more useful than finding then site. But from a land use point of view it would be nice/interesting to be able to sum up land use area by denomination.

I have noticed that before and am torn. From a dataset point of view accuracy would mean tag correctly and that this is a map rendering issue, but I have done my share of tweaks to make the map look right.

I have seen the whole church building in an area vs church.

I think the most correct answer is to put in a feature request for the map renderer to suppress the building religious symbol or area symbol if close enough to another symbol from a more specific or less specific parent or surrounding/surrounded entity.

I have also had it on my list to put in a request or see what it would take to use denomination specific symbols instead of the cross for all Christian denominations as some of them, such as this one don’t use that symbol and actively avoid it.

Create a multipoly relationship for the scrub. Once you do that you can add other relationships such as the parking lot as inner. I see that the scrub icons are on the parking lot so adding it as inner makes sense. I try to do that but the go map!! Client can get confused if too many related relationships change or are created in the same commit, so sometimes I forget to do some of the inners In some ways it is easier than the web client for doing relationships.

You’re correct about the stop. I just haven’t physically been in that spot since it was put in. I visited Today and I restored it took some GPS tracks during some of the other amenities.

The Aggie shuttle stop sign is now on the same pole as the green loop sign and the sign shows stop number 23 and not the prior stop number 24. The Aggie shuttle map still shows the stop numbered as 24. I’ll check the prior 23 and see if that number is changed to the map is a year old given the GroundTruth rule probably should change the stock number to 23 or someone should request the sign to be updated if it is in fact 24.

Some. I use these trails a lot. After I get maybe 20-30 GPS tracks I can see some areas where the average is off to the side.
One of these days I plan to take a RTK or survey receiver along with me and nail down a few spots where I think the GPS is off and the LIDAR isn't as good, but all small tweaks.

Yes. The national maps. Some areas are high read and others less so but LiDAR can see through trees and so is helpful, sometimes, for mapping. If high res I find it to be the best source.

Open to the public as far as I know. There are no gates or signs prohibiting access and I see people there all the time. There are no markings on the ground but the gras part is mowed and the gravel part is maintained so the path is obvious. There are sign posts for men’s and women’s courses at the mile or maybe km points so you can kinda see which way to go. There is course map on the usu website.