“left;none” makes no sense, unless “none” is always understood as “through with no markings”. I’ve created a proposal for a new type of from-via-to relation that would solve this problem of lane markings not matching actual lane connectivity, as well as a ton of other issues with turn:lanes.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Connectivity

A connectivity relation could be used at that location to state how the lanes connect that would override the “turn:lanes”, allowing that tag to only state the lane markings, not the connectivity. If anyone has any suggestions for how to improve the proposal, please let me know!

https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index

You could suggest adding it to the osm imagery Index on GitHub, so that everyone using iD or JOSM in the area could use it.

The JOSM validator also finds invalid syntax - you can just download all objects in an area that have opening hours, and then use the validator window to find invalid ones. Overpass download in JOSM lets you only download the objects you want. It is available if you turn on expert mode

One is to abandon landuse=forest. Replace it all with ‘natural=wood’.

I like this idea a lot. In my opinion, the best solution is to use natural=wood on all tree cover, and then use managed=yes/no/scientific/* to state whether the wood is managed.

But how do I tag this one? highway=polka_dots?

I would use the tag smoothness=bad on the road.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness

Happy mapping!

Nice!

Awesome!

You could try using StreetComplete.

A while back, the OSM community imported tiger data for the whole United States, starting OSM in the United States with a “complete” road dataset. It’s very low quality, though.

Is this too much for you? https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/55.93698/12.30348

Nice!

Awesome project! I like how you add all information about addresses, not just addr:housenumber and addr:street. Including all tags makes OSM much more detailed.

By the way, Microsoft has released building footprints for the entire US that can be imported into OSM. Importing them might be a fun project to do in your county if you’re interested.

@escada that is correct. What I meant was that area:highway=residential should not include sidewalks, grass, and other features not on the street but inside of the easement. Separate area:highway features can be used for sidewalks.

By the way, area:highway should not include sidewalks, just the street.

I like the colors you tried, but think that they would make overlayed data less visible. The current color scheme makes for a good background map, and not as good browsing map.

I would love to see Bergen County as one of the best openly-mapped areas in the world one day. You’d have to compete with Chapel Hill, North Carolina to achieve that. :)

I prefer the “contact:” scheme as well. Nice diary entry!

If you are adding street lamps, make sure to check out this map! http://inai.de/sl/#15/33.4539/-112.0834 It uses the overpass api, so overpass turbo would also work. I have added a large amount of street lamp and street surface data in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. http://inai.de/sl/#16/35.9567/-79.0636 http://product.itoworld.com/map/215?lon=-79.06052&lat=35.92661&zoom=12 Leif Rasmussen