Hej! I will be passing by this shelter soon and just wanted to ask: can anyone use it? is it free?

kind regards!

spoke to soon, I have gone through and fixed the others, thanks again!

Hi!
Great catch, thanks!
I found the bug and corrected it, it seems like this is the only affected node (only one that was "undergoud" before).
I will also manually fix this node

Thanks for your contribution! One note: I dont think "Large waterfall" is a good name since its basically a description, see osm.wiki/Names#Good_practice .

On a unrelated note, is the dog "Blackie" still around the house in the village? She was so cute!

Thanks for your work though, the area looks great!

hmm interesting, dont know eather. Maybe man_made=water_tap might be better? I was just wondering if this was a misstaged toilet but I guess its just a wierd edge case

osm.org/node/11999437737/history

what is this toilets:handwashing node?

thank you for your feedback. I will go through and double check my pedicure edits

Indeed, some of the iD fixes are problematic, I have contributed some fixes in the past to the iD repository but other ones, such as the misspeling of "Göteborgs Stad" still need to be fixed. I generally only resolve obvious fixes to places I have already been.

@archie I suggest reading the wiki, "Rendering of a map is the process of making a visual image on the basis of raw geospatial data and tags. ". A router is not a renderer. Just read it and see for yourself and don't spread fakes.

I did not take a photo when I was there in person. Google has a picture but I am not sure if posting it here would be considered a copyright issue, since I am mapping based on local knowledge, and only trying to prove my point I guess?

Also note the "resolved" tags in my changeset. It seemed redundant to reiterate them in the changeset comment, but I will do so in the future

Hej SomeoneElse, thank you for your feedback. However I still believe that a node is much more appropriate here since the vast majority of these ways are longer, and block off two different areas where they function more as a fence. None of the ones I checked even intersected with a path / road. However this particular way was extremely short (only two rocks), and functioned only to block the path with two rocks.
Additionally such barriers become very hard for routers to parse, especially when there are no shared nodes with the correct tags (as was the case here). In fact I was unable to find any barrier paths crossing ways where the shared node was not also tagged.

The same straw man again, and again and again...

Well it seems like you are unwilling to engage in any form of constructive discussion. Instead you have been making up falsehoods while completely ignoring any of my arguments. Feel free to actually read any of the reasoning I have given (osm.org/changeset/166128294#c1434141 for example) to you and contact me again once you are willing to engage in constructive discussion.

in wiki osm.wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dblock "Start by placing a tag barrier=block on a node node that's part of an existing way to indicate where the barrier is."

I will once again refer you to the discussion on said change set: osm.org/changeset/166126886#c1434124

Where you can see that I acknowledged the mistake and fixed it, only for you to once again revert it.

Here one of my comments from the other discussion that you ignored: A barrier needs to be a node on the way that it is blocking, otherwise it cannot be parsed by any router.
You can optionally add the barrier as a way, but if the intersection node is not tagged as a barrier it wont work.

Instead of engaging in any discussion on this topic with your fellow mappers you have decided to repeatedly revert my work.

I applaud that you are finally willing to have a discussion, next time discuss such things with your fellow editors before engaging in vandalism.