Hannes,
Re-reading my messages, let me say I'm sorry if my tone was overly hostile. I appreciate that you and many others are contributing in good faith to a project that we all care about. I just feel that Toronto in particular has a real issue with editors racing toward "completeness" without taking the time to tend to or improve (or sometimes even acknowledge) the data that's already here. Perhaps I'm overstating the problem, and perhaps some of my frustration is attributable in particular to certain low quality imports done in pursuit of "completeness". In any event, I agree that the landuses in question largely overlapped with the areas in the real world they were meant to represent. My issue is with the spatial accuracy of the data. In areas with a good deal of spatially fine-grained mapping (sidewalks, two-way streetcar tracks, bus shelters mapped as areas, etc) I think it is inappropriate and indeed counter-productive to drop in low-resolution landuse data that overlaps these features haphazardly. It causes validation errors, gets in the way of other high-accuracy editing, and IMO generally sets a low bar for new editors in the area.

I know that's not what you saw yourself as doing and at this point it's hard to say. The path forward in any case is to keep working to make it all better.

I believe it is better to take the time to do it right the first time, rather than relying on the efforts of others who did not volunteer to clean up low-quality data hastily added to their neighborhood. I'd much rather have some good data with gaps than comprehensive junk.

Whenever I stumble across random highly-detailed, well-tagged data in the middle of nowhere, I wonder "who did that?" Almost inevitably, it is Minh.

There are a few people in Ottawa that can be pretty aggressive with their edits, IMO. Let's hope they reach out like you did before interpreting the intention or validity of people's good faith edits :-)

I guess in the meantime, perhaps I ought to include some more justification in my changeset comments to try and head this off.

I used to think so as well, but I think the wiki actually makes a pretty good case for it: osm.wiki/Key:addr

In this case it's useful for my needs as a data consumer because I'm looking at embassies across many countries and it's not obvious what level the "city" is in each case. Australia for example has a very different way of breaking up what we might call "Canberra" into fragmented administrative units.

If this building really is part of the larger embassy then we should probably join it to the others with a relation and specify its particular role if any

I tried to revert this changeset but it looks like someone has already corrected/updated the boundary for India, creating edit conflicts. It may be easiest now to correct the problem manually.

osm.org/changeset/100152522

I have reverted this and your previous changeset. I'm not sure what else you did, but you somehow managed to delete the relation describing the city boundary of Leduc. I strongly advise that relatively new editors like yourself steer clear of complex relations like these as the potential for damage can be pretty high.

The wiki describes the proper use and structure of these relations in detail, and I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

I don't mean to be discouraging, and everyone's efforts are appreciated, but deleting a city boundary is a pretty big problem. It is important to take the time to fully understand the impact of your edits.

Looks like you got a bit ahead of actual construction here. I just rode Bloor and there is no lane yet between Indian Road and Sterling Road. I think the installation is delayed due to the construction around there taking up a full lane. Sewers or something.

Crudely drawn landuses are really not very helpful here. You've created a residential area for example that roughly overlaps parks, retail and schools.

Please, if you can't do something with some care and attention to detail, do not edit in this area!

Thanks!

Why would highways not be a valid part of a boundary relation?

Yep - I did :-)

Be careful with the copy/paste feature - I just found a couple places where a whole street (geometry + tags) was accidentally copied into new location, probably while you were trying to copy tags only.

JOSM seems to have changed their ctr+v vs ctr+shift+v behavior recently.

Thanks!

This was vandalism and has been reverted.

It does look like that.

It looks like I managed to get that perfectly backwards somehow. It should have been a no_left going the opposite direction. I've fixed it. Good catch! Thanks.

Yep - it works in OSRM. Let me know if you see issues with other routers though.