I don't think I understand your question @LineScribe. The way I use tourism is almost always paired with another description in the tagging system. Let's use the Mamba way from this changeset (way=290457653). That attraction will get the tourism=attraction tag but will get a description tag of attraction=roller_coaster to help describe it. Tourism=attraction tags almost always get applied to the building/roof that houses the attraction (see Mamba for example). Sometimes the set of tags will get applied as an area like over at the Scandi Scrambler ride here at Worlds of Fun (way=318163258) where the area of the attraction is easily identified and doesn't overlap any other attraction areas. But tagging areas for large rides often cause confusion to anyone who would use the map so it's generally discouraged. You can check the OSM Wiki page about toursim=attraction for additional guidelines. (osm.wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dattraction)

Thank you for catching the error. I have since deleted the way in the change set: 153213773. It was a leftover way when I merged multiple ways together from an initial, what looked to be, a map with AI edit.

@Mateusz Konieczny,
I have corrected the error in changeset 146969759. Yes, that error was a misspelling as the name is plural and the tag is not. Thanks for the heads up.

I have been told in the past that the tag virtual=yes was for routing purposes (if you can give me some time I might be able to pull the comment on a different changeset). There has been a long term disagreement on mapping pedestrian areas in the park with either ways connecting to points interest or using area=yes tags in defining the whole area. So I personally lean towards the area method but when I map new areas use highway=footway/pedestrian ways to build the skeleton until I can nail down the landscape features and then draw an enclosed way with both the tags highway=pedestrian and area=yes to encompass the area. But in the past I have just turned the tags on the skeleton ways off with the idea that the future when the debate was settled I can retag them in whatever the new agreed format would be. I in the past few weeks have been called out by different moderator for forgetting to change blank ways to something as have ways in the system with no tags is considered improper. So about a year ago I was involved with another mod sweep and was told to set the ways to highway=footway and virtual=yes and I forgot to get around to it. So I finally fixed it against my better judgment. Personally I want to delete the ways but then you lose the ability to use navigation, so I am unsure how to proceed.

I don’t why Portlach does it but it divides my changes into multiple change sets every time I save. This set was apart of Changeset 139147382.

Sorry, I am unsure what that feature was, I think it was a building in the shape of a boat on the water but it looks like it has been removed. I think I was looking for verification of the feature and just forgot about it. Disney has changed out the shows and their elements in the past couple of years so I am unsure what it was. In the recent satellite images, it's gone now so I will remove the way.

I think it’s was supposed to be natural=water. I will fix it when I get a chance. Thanks for pointing out the mistake.

Hello. Those lines are the footway ways that I used before I started using the footway areas. I haven't deleted them because even though they are not in use they may be useful in the future for navigation purposes. There are massive problems with Area footways and routing. I was reading on someone's diary several years ago that ways may have to used to solve routing issues and have left them blank until the time for them to be redefined for use.
Also. it would be more helpful before making an edit you should notify the person who originally made the edits to see what the intent was before making modifications. I have been working on this area for over 10 years. I have not had any issues with blank ways before.

Hello, just checking out your first changeset (100787426) to the OpenStreetMap Project. I noticed that you included personal data in your data including locations that pertain to your residency. While adding buildings or places that you are familiar with, including your own house, please do not include your own personal identity to the buildings. This map publicly viewed worldwide and should not be taken as a personal project.

@Hendrikklaas Wheelmap_visitor is a bot that make changes based on user input on their map. Don't expect a response.

Hello,
There are some massive errors with edits on the Disneyland Resort made in this change set. I have already reverted the changes I deemed were made in error. The biggest fault was the change of the DL Central Bakery to the Grand Bakery which looking at the data you posted is located in Seattle region and has nothing to do with a backstage facility at a Theme Park.

Fixed it thanks

Hey. Taking a look at way: 894696391 (Infant Sacrifice Ritual Area). There is a lot of Red flags going off for this entry. First off you building way measures 696m long (or 2300ft) while a building of this length would not be out of the ordinary for a warehouse, the locations in the middle of an ice sheet in Greenland makes this almost impossible. Checking over Arial maps of the location shows no sign of civilization or anything that would represent a place of human remnants. The other is the source of the your edit. This is a let alone a controversial place of worship and definitely needs some sort of source. All religions and faith are welcome on Openstreetmap but this seems to me to be a spam edit. If this way was mismarked as a Place of Worship/Church by mistake it maybe changed over to historic=ritual_site or to something more appropriate. I encourage you to look over the Map Features page of the OSM wiki: osm.wiki/Map_features. also be sure to include sources (webpages, books, articles, ect) in your edits of areas of low map visibility (source=*).

Nope. It was just supposed to be a simple circle building. Portlach must have screwed up when trying to make circler and I didn’t catch it. Thanks for the fix.

So just checking out the different tag types:
*It turns out that my tagging style is actually used the most with my tags equaling 179 usages (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=height_requirement)
*minheight is only used 41 times. Also to add to my case it looks like maxheight is still to ambiguous with over 95 different usage types.
*If we do start using maxheight we have to start using tag maxheight:attraction=* to separate from the other 95 different types of tags (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=maxheight).
*Currently maxheight=* is being used for max height of vehicles with bridges and tunnels roadway (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/maxheight).

The tag is at best ambiguous and on the same structure could be needed in duplication. The current definition is purposing said tag but that tag would not be appropriate for something like Power Tower as the does the building or the attraction get the min_height tag and how would you discern between the two without building a structure like that piece by piece. Further definitions or new tagging agreements by the community need to be passed. In fact there are a slue of issues with Theme park tagging especially with the attraction=* tags. It doesn't seem like the there is enough of us Theme Park editors to get our voice out about these issues.

If both of you have check what min_height=* applies to is mapping of 3D objects in OSM. It applies to the lowest height a building/wall is placed in the render. We should not get this tag mixed up with a tag I use that is meant for attraction=* ways. If you want to see what I am referring to take a look at: osm.wiki/wiki/3D_tagging. And for the the actual tag min_height =* : osm.wiki/Key:min_height.

I'll do you one better and finish it today. I have the day off from work.

Location of trace layover: osm.org/changeset/85516740#map=19/28.35416/-81.56224

Original location of trace data from: osm.org/query?lat=33.81461&lon=-117.92071#map=19/33.81460/-117.92071

Sorry. This is a direct copy of Disneyland's Galaxy's Edge. I have physically mapped that one out in person so I copied the ways in a single trace. I was intending on dropping it over the FL duplicated version and trace new ways in. This trace is supposed to sit in the area between First Order Cargo and Olga's Cantina. The problem arose in it appears that the two projects do not scale properly between the two versions (either because the actual area is a different scale or because map projection, but I think its the first option) I am planning on checking out public imagery more closely to see if I'm still able to trace ways with minor adjustments. I am trying to still decide on what route to take but other edits have distracted me from finish that project.