yeah thanks I realized my mistake afterwards aswell, they have all been corrected

is this fix-me issue resolved with this changset osm.org/relation/7379419

fix-me taged solved with the following changeset
osm.org/changeset/145490644

tagged amenity as office_union,

no worries thankyou

do you have it now? the sender in my inbox just came up as "DWG" and I was replying to it but I think I was replying to a message instead sorry for the confusion

just noticed that its from the email address that is saved with OSM not my personal one if that helps

Re: [Ticket#2023122210000115] Issue #28303 thats the one ive been replying to that I got the email from

I responded by replying to the email from the DWG that I received. I have not heard back since I replied either. I will copy and paste the email here if you want

DWG email

@fizzie, the discussion has moved elsewhere

page 32 under "Road function description" https://www.dit.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/658692/MASTER_SPECIFICATION_-_PART_M11_-_UNSEALED_ROADS.pdf im not stupid, I went to uni and everything and passed.

also the other day fortera changed a residential road to secondary road because OSMcha told him too lmao, then he defends this edit but realised after a while it was wrong. so then he changed these others secondary roads to territory because he lost the argument and wanted to prove something. the roads he changed from secondary to territory was part of south australia major shipping transport route lmao. and im expected to blindly accept his "because I think it is" as fact.

page 17 shows the major traffic route which covers the trunk roads and matches the OSM wiki rules for being "major traffic roads", the secondary road network from data sa matches the definition of how secondary roads should be classified and so does the primary roads. If I need to post sources and meanings and references and have long discussions about this. We need more information and data and sources for someone to simply say its a territory road "because I think it is", right now it would be classified incorrectly as a territory road if I didnt catch it.

@ouchkars no not you bro, we were the first people to discuss the data sa road classification, I was even against it at first remember because of the trunk roads. I am talking about fortera and kurisubrooks

I made a diary entry for the whole community to see, so that they know what trolls I have to deal with osm.org/user/slice0/diary

here I am posting dictionary meaning and government sources and all we have here is simply a troll/vandel and someone else defending the troll/vandel lmao. I will be using this changeset comment log if any further issues are brought up. have a nice day

lmao have either of you two even read the wiki, the very first sentence "Use highway=secondary to tag highways which are not part of major routes, but nevertheless form a link in the national route network." that is exactly the definition of the road in question here, far out you guys dont even know what you are arguing for here. you are both saying the wiki is right and everything well I have news for you I agree and going by the wiki it should be secondary. far out I hope the board and dwg member see how pointless this whole argument has been considering the wiki says it should be secondary lmao. I think we need to start posting out uni degrees from now on.

and also just for your own knowledge because you seem to comment a lot when I am involved in a discussion. this road was classed as secondary based on OSM guideline, government sources and definitions and "what is on the ground". fortera decided to use their own interpretation and with out discussion went ahead and changed. I am merely reverting it and saying hey we should talk about it first. why does it feel like i need to defend my actions when I did nothing wrong in the first place.

@kurisbrooks, also your not here to seek to understand anything though are you? you open with a bias statement out of nowhere and now leaving it up to me to prove why fortera is wrong. thankyou for stopping by in the changelog discussion and goodbye