The question then becomes what the node actually is ... historic site at least makes it a distinct rather than null node with additional tags. I take point that historic is of subjective weighting. I'll maybe throw it up on the telegram group and see what thoughts emerge. Wiki doesn't seem to elaborate too much.

Great Suggestion - thanks. Was struggling to figure what appropriate for historic and potentially even just ruined or even gone. What do you think stay with historic_railway: station and abandoned_railway: station or even just one of those? Thought v welcome. Shawn

I am actually hurt by these comments and I have to say these have been the most unhelpful I have ever received on OSM. Sorry to be blunt. I have been micro mapping (in this case in my Mother's hometown and one I have appreciated visiting) and enjoying this and felt this was making a contribution to how others may use OSM data. I based this on the use of the most up-to-date imagery as you yourself suggested. As OSM is collaborative and the expectation is that others will continually review and update I would expect that everyone does when they have the time for in the moment and that is how collaboration works. Some 'own' areas and dwell in them - while others may connect with areas where they feel they can contribute missing features as a specific project. I would of course expect that others (or myself) will come along when new imagery is available and alter to reflect the current state of the world. As it is, I have been grateful to contribute but also very respectful that others may have alternate opinions and uses of the data provided. I have been respectful (or so I thought in my comments) - as I have been when validating others' contributions widely in OSMIreland tasks. As mentioned earlier tree cover and natural and planted vegetation are of interest. I am very concerned about the practice of removing objects from a map that do clearly exist with the perceived foresight that they will disappear at some future point - or conflict with particular users' mapping preferences. I will note that micro-mapping is globally practiced and taking the effort to attempt to identify individual micro-features is valuable - depending on the vastly different needs of individual users of the data. The statement that a user's mapping is exaggerated is a rather subjective one. Just to state it clearly, I believe that OSM relies on users who are respectful and appreciate different approaches and aspects of mapping, micro and macro, and when they work together and discuss this contributes to the collaborative effort. Thanks for your own efforts.

Dear osmviborg,
I note that you continue to delete trees, shrubs, and driveways from my edits. Have I missed a comment indicating how these have been improperly mapped? I would hope to do so correctly. Thanks

MY rationale is uninformedly based on discussion on the reddit channel about way finding and an attempt to flag private / public access. Where a public access thoroughfare ends to give it a no-exit cap for way finding applications and subsequently as a private way to also provide some endpoint. Some seemed to suggest that this unnecessary and other that this at least allows the various clients and users to make that distinction for themselves. Certainly welcome discussion and appreciate your own sagacity. Thanks.

I am actually attempting to determine tree crowns in those areas - Am sorry if they appear random. one of my students is exploring tree cover in DK, IRL and CA using a few samples and so best attempts at identifying individual trunks has proved fruitful for her. Apologies if they appear random. They are placed based on perceived colour differentiation as a means to find the individual trees. Using natural=wood is useful for some means but in this instance skewed calculations - especially when there is a higher probability of using the imagery to pinpoint accuracy at a tree by tree level and overpass-turbo. Appreciate your attention to detail and the varied uses of OSM data

I have - I am mapping private recreational spaces (patios, verandas, desks) primarily any built space for leisure activities - in private space. I could not find a more appropriate tag than outdoor_sitting. I have noted that this is often (but not exclusively) used for cafes and restaurants but there does not seem to be an appropriate alternate. Thanks for noting - any suggestions?
Shawn

Tx osmviborg - can you please elaborate on this one to help me understand. These are two separate and distinct ways? Yes?

Tx osmviborg. Much appreciated.

Dear osmviborg - oops on my tag was carried over from some other editing apologies. Should I not be using multiple imagery in DK? Had been using the SDFE as well as BING and ESRI and am in the habit of comparing between them to catch changes and subtleties.
Thanks for the pointers,
Shawn

Thanks for catching that. Sorry. Shawn

Is appreciated. Sincerely. Flipping back and forth now as we go. Best. Shawn

Thanks for the note. I shoud have been more prudent in checking the dates for the area. Bing is more dated where I normally am mapping and ESRI more current. My assumption. Will have to revisit these edits. Thanks.

Fair enough. Thanks for pointing that out.

Well identified and most cool.
Here I was seeing shadows of hydro electric lines. Thanks @VictorIE

Sorry for the crap tags. Forgot to change my comments. Oops

Sorry for the crap tags. Forgot to change my comments. Oops