G'day EugenioVacca, and welcome to OpenStreetMap

When adding building outlines, best practice is to press the "Q" key after drawing. This will ensure that all lines and angles are aligned 90 degrees, which is generally the case for buildings.

Cheers,
ortho_is_hot

Thanks for pointing that issue out; yes "Biga" is the name. I've gone ahead and fixed it: osm.org/node/7400227061

Cheers,
ortho_is_hot

survey:date is actually 2019-11-20

survey:date is actually 2019-11-20

I checked the mapillary images whilst editing and as per the images, the benches that I deleted do not exist. They are not visible in the mapillary images, aerial imagery, or in my own photographs which are the most up to date

Apologies, I just noticed the updated date due to the weather issues

Hi, from what source are these dates? From what I've seen, the underpass opened today and partly yesterday. I will be surveying this today unless there has been a modification to the dates?

Cheers,
ortho_is_hot
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82766631

Hi,

What source did you get the new road geometry from? I can't see any of it on the listed imagery_used ?

Cheers,
ortho_is_hot

G'day C24B,

When you refer to "council records", is this separate from the base map that you've used in the editor? If so, which council and do you know if there is a waiver for the information to be included in OSM?

Thanks,
ortho_is_hot

Also you can add a specific entrance node on the building outline which may show up on some renderers as a direct way to enter the business

I've gone ahead and fixed some of the roadway tagging and specified that access is allowed for customers. Also, I've added a parking lot nearby which is marked as having no fee; you can add a description to it if you want to directly specify that it is for the business park, etc. Also, if you know the extent of the "Alexandria Technology Park" (I don't personally know whether its the entire block or whatever) then you can add an outline as a commercial area and apply the name to that area as well.

Hi georgeorb,

With roads such as here: osm.org/way/779744884 you don't need to added access tagging for every mode—it is implied that access is equal to yes for all modes without adding the tag. In which case access, horse, foot, motor_vehicle, etc can be safely removed whilst still maintaining the same meaning. Additionally if the roads are on private property then they should be tagged with just access=private unless they specifically permit people to drive through.

Also I noticed here, you removed noname=yes from this road segment: osm.org/way/173225317/ does this road have a name in reality? noname=yes specifies that there is no name for that section of road.

Cheers,
ortho_is_hot

@aharvey you are correct, this section is signposted as two way for all traffic (only really useful for ambulances but there regardless) then becomes oneway after the station. thanks for the revert

Localknowledge: just the section where it connects to the road is oneway (short segment and near an island) and the rest is two way. thanks for the revert

G'day GIID,

Others have pointed out issues with your data contributions to the OSM project (see osm.org/changeset/81463420 and osm.org/changeset/81581902) and you have continued to add incorrect data to the project.

You do not need an individual market for each entrance, there are other tags you can use. Additionally you have introduced your own proprietary, unexplained tagging schemes that are not documented.

I, and others, are of the opinion that such changes should be reverted soon. If you wish to experiment with the OSM data stack then there are other software solutions that you can use rather than compromising the map for other users.

Regards,
ortho_is_hot

G'day deevee78 and welcome to OSM,

If only buses are allowed to violate the turn restriction then I suggest that you use except=bus instead of except=psv as psv encompasses buses as well as taxis and other vehicles. Of course this depends on what the sign says in reality.

Cheers,
ortho_is_hot

This changeset has been reverted (osm.org/changeset/81260261)

"Reverted changeset 81216574 (unncessary way modifications) based on private communication"

I've gone ahead and created a wiki page (osm.wiki/TfNSW_Cycleways_Data) where details can be added after it is discussed with talk-au, which is something that should be planned shortly (perhaps as a group message). Seeing as quarky created the gist and made the data usable, I'll have to see whether they want to do it themselves.

"suface" was a misspelling on my part, I'll go ahead and fix it now.

Having checked back with the documentation for the data, I agree that difficulty is not a good idea to include, mainly as "Default is dependent on class" and 3 levels is not fine enough of a gradation to be useful in my opinion.

I'm in two minds about the ref—on one hand it links back to the TfNSW database in the same way that other keys do, but on the other hand such a database doesn't seem to be publicly accessible. I think I lean towards excluding it in this case.

You're correct, it's in the International server but the channel itself is right at the very bottom in the server. I've gone ahead and at mentioned you in the channel so you should be able to find it.

Aggreed, I feel that this data is good for reference such as width key or operator, rather than importing missing data without other checks.

Also if you're interested in using it, another mapper has created an XML for osmosis use to convert it into OSM keys (OSM discord server, #asia-pacific channel)