In OpenStreetMap, you can add things to the map yourself! Move the map to the area you want to change, and then click the “edit” button in the top bar. The software will teach you how to use it. If you need help, go here.

You were banned for constantly “being disruptive, annoying other members, posting rude/crude content, and ignoring repeat warnings from the mods.”

It was always mentioned just as a data source.

Correct, OSM is first and foremost a database for building world maps, not one singular map. Therefore cartography is entirely irrelevant to the project. OSM strives to document the world as it exists, not produce some cartographer’s subjective interpretation. Stop trying to use OSM to platform your political agenda.

This means that data consumers are unable to determine if the way segment is un-classified, or if it is indeed … when such minor service way connected to parking_aisles are encountered..

This is true. There is a need for a service=* sub-tag to indicate parking lot access roads.

It is also true that the unfortunate naming of service=driveway has caused confusion among those wanting to tag parking lot entrances.

The problem lies with the “classical” definition of driveway, which in the early days of OSM defines it as “a short private road that leads from a street to a person’s house or garage”, sourced from the “American” section of Cambridge’s dictionary.

As I see it, even though they look like it, OSM tags are not English, so an English dictionary is irrelevant. For example:

• colour=* and amenity=community_centre are named after words in UK English, but footway=sidewalk and sport=soccer are named after terms in US English. If OSM tags were just written in English, these tags would need to be renamed to be consistent.
• amenity=kneipp_water_cure and mofa=* are named after terms that don’t exist in my English dictionary at all.
• The value of name=* is supposed to be written in the language that is recognized locally. This is usually not English.

Nevertheless, let’s dive into history where driveway was first defined - ironically in the US California Streets and Highway Code (SHC), which first introduces the driveway term in 1971.

When writing a proposal, referring to laws as evidence of a feature is a good idea, but not to define the use of a pre-existing tag. OSM tags are not strictly defined based on laws.

insisting that SHC/UK definitions do not matter

That is correct.

This is something I am proud of, because we are following the process to document tags use instead of trying to fix the service=driveway Wiki page which we have already accepted will be left in the US definition.

The process for introducing new tags is to go through a proposal. It is designed to generate community consensus, which can then be documented on a wiki page for the tag. Inventing a tag, then using your own use of it to justify documentation, justifying further use, feels more like a rejection of the community and a petty workaround, than collaborating with the OSM community.

I did not want make this accusation with merely correlation and suspicion. So, I made an Overpass query that returns all uses of service=driveway2 and includes the name of the editor that last edited that way. I then tallied up the numbers of each user, and found that JaLooooNz edited 3029 instances of service=driveway2. The other 14 users that used that tag used it a total of 29 times. The wiki page for service=driveway2 was also first created by wiki user JaLooNz.

this becomes a form of personal attack which is uncalled for.

I have not seen any personal attacks (on either side, luckily), and I don’t understand how documenting tag history constitutes as one. If you feel comfortable, I’m sure many would appreciate a further explanation, or feedback to make communication more accepting. Personally, I would consider “unprofessional behavior” to include things such as ignoring tagging guidelines, and inventing community consensus.

I would be happy to add my “yes” vote to a well-thought-out proposal for a service=* value for what you consider a “driveway.”

Thanks for putting in the hard work! I agree, it can seem slow sometimes. IMO open data, even if not high quality enough to be imported directly, is still useful for finding areas that need to be surveyed, and providing supplemental data. Importing only parcel or building centroids sounds like a good idea. Address info is valuable on its own and can, again, give hints to mappers to which buildings need to be outlined.

Regarding #1, MS buildings are generated from aerial imagery, which is often misaligned from ground truth. I might trust the municipal data more in this regard.

#2 sounds like a good idea, as long as the detection method doesn’t catch shallow, almost-90° angles that are part of curves. Some municipal data also might have already done a similar orthogonalization pass.

I’ve used location=indoor do describe shops (as a separate node) inside other shops, but I think I’m the only one—indoor=yes is more common.

This is awesome! Great job!

Abbreviations are generally not wanted in OSM, since they are ambiguous, and the long form can always be shortened when necessary: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29