Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12017-12-16 19:49:48 UTCWarin61 Hi,
In the relationship 7814228 for this retirement village ... why are some buildings excluded from the village? I suppose what I am getting at is .. is the relationship really required?
12017-12-13 05:19:57 UTCSunfishtommy In this changeset you outlined areas that seem to be a town and labeled them as airdrome=airport. The town of Balimo. I am going to fix it, but double check your changes residential areas should really be landuse=residential.
22017-12-13 05:25:27 UTCSunfishtommy Also I just double checked the place where you put the Balimo airport in this changeset is not where it is actually located.
32017-12-13 07:51:49 UTCWarin61 Thanks for spotting this error! I wonder how I made it... I certainly would not have added all that wikipedia and other detailed tags .. I'll add those to the correct airport .. but my error.
12017-12-04 00:36:01 UTCtonyf1 Hi. Welcome to OSM. You have changed relation 7125879, which extends 2km south of your new subdivision road all the way to the Peter Murrel State Reserve from natural=wood to landuse=residential. Is this what you intended?
22017-12-07 01:18:15 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I have changed this back to trees .. that is what is observable in bing. Newton3 .. you need to say what you are using for this change - it could be 'local knowledge' - that is very good and will trump any satellite imagery! However the relation, as ronyf1, says covers some areas that are desig...
32017-12-07 02:25:51 UTCtonyf1 Thanks Warin61
42017-12-10 23:28:49 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I have separated the relation into 2 relations. The northern one could be a residential development Relation: 7798537. I have left it as trees, but it could be come landuse=brownfield with things are being built then landuse=residential .. but it needs local input to be certain.
Over to you ...
12017-12-09 02:20:44 UTCWarin61 Hi,
removal of way 4754106 has destroyed relation 7780209 as this was the outer for the relation. Did you really mean to remove the relation?
22017-12-10 15:17:32 UTCOSM_Ravage Howdy Warin61,
I do believe this was intentional, it's possible that I've misunderstood how to properly use the merge function when I added the parks inside the landuse boundary. This is, and was a temporary solution until I completely unhook the parks from the residential boundaries, and/or parcel...
32017-12-10 20:25:16 UTCWarin61 Ok,
I have deleted the relation.
landuse=residential is not intended to mark individual properties. Accepted practice is to mark a block, suburb, village, town or city. Having small areas of other landuse inside landuse=residential is accepted practice. So I don't think that this will improve the...
42017-12-11 03:36:46 UTCOSM_Ravage Yes, once the houses get parceled in, I'll be adding in the numbers, it's a work in progress.
12017-12-10 03:55:06 UTCWarin61 Hi,
1) The change set comment "change" does not describe what you are doing. This has been noted before yet you continue to use it.
2) You look to be ignoring the problems you have made through the changes you have made on existing OSM data. Please make corrections to fix these errors t...
22017-12-10 04:01:45 UTCWarin61 Note: Any messages you send me concerning this will be copied here, so others can see you response.
12017-11-29 20:46:01 UTCWarin61 Hi,
You changes have generated a number of problems.
Take a look at
You need to realize there is already stuff there, moving nodes around makes the old stuff wrong.
I'm not an Id user so cannot help you there....
22017-11-29 21:02:12 UTCWarin61 Please respond to this message.
32017-11-30 01:40:09 UTCWarin61 You have approximately 23 errors on I am not going through your multiple edits to determine which error goes exactly with what change set.
Please correct the errors.
12017-11-28 21:53:04 UTCWarin61 Hi,
relation 7676161 (farmland) has had it only outer way removed - now consists only of inner ... should this relation be removed???
12017-11-28 21:44:05 UTCWarin61 Hi, welcome to OSM.

You have removed the name 'Manns Beach' from an administrative area ... Why? Note this is the name of an area .. it may take its name from a beach ... so it may be larger than the beach itself.

Your changes may have made the ways 'self intersect' .. but some one has correc...
12017-11-25 20:53:18 UTCWarin61 HI,
Welcome to OSM.

The way 540628661 tagged 'landuse=residential' has some problems.
First I cannot see it with the source you have of LIP Imagery .. but it does show up with bing - so I'll add the source tag to the way 540628661 - that will make it clear to anyone else who comes along. Err ....
12017-11-21 21:36:05 UTCWarin61 Hi,
These wetlands would be better mapped as a relation.
Using relations would allow the use of the river bank as part of the outer way.

At present these generate errors on OSMinspector - ways with shared segments.
22017-11-22 15:44:42 UTCArietigue Hi,
Thanks, I'll look into that.
12017-11-19 22:45:25 UTCaharvey With the survey marks you've added like

How about:
* use the ref tag for the number so it's machine readable
* use survey_point=mark or something like that to distinguish from trig stations with a pillar
* what's the value of repeating the coordina...
22017-11-19 23:20:38 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I used the note to preserve the location .. if someone moved it (for what ever reason) I would have a reference for moving it back without going through my sources.

Source ... umm will have to think on it. ?LPI ...
I used these for minor alignment with LPI base map, my gpx files
Yes to ...
12017-11-19 20:04:36 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The name key should not be used to describe the function. Use the description key if you must. E.G. 'Pit Lane' way 116586618.
12017-11-13 21:37:16 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The relation 7723473 - building=house has 3 outers that touch. This is flagged as an error in OSMinspector. They do look like all one building - so a single way rather than a relation?
22017-11-14 05:29:36 UTCClipArtJoel Yeah this is probably due to the way the iD editor handles merging.

Anyway I fixed it.
12017-11-13 02:04:02 UTCWarin61 Hi
In Australia the default language is English. OSM tag the name=* tag to be the same as the name:en=* to be the same (in Australia). Yet you have them as different. Just use the name=* tag. If there is a local name or alt name then use the tags loc_name=* or alt_name=*
12017-11-12 21:50:35 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relations don't like touching outer - you have 2 touching buildings... in this relation 7722753.
Do they really touch?
If so is there is 'knock through' to provide passage between the two? Then they would be considered one building.
Or if they don't touch at the walls then separate them - ...
22017-11-13 04:11:32 UTCClipArtJoel No it's all one building, Just a different roof.

I've fixed it now.
12017-11-12 21:44:38 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The Lalor Library relation 7725472 has 2 building that touch one another, there roles are 'outer' in the relation. Relations don't like touching outers.
So .. do the buildings really touch? If so is there not a 'knock through' to provide passage between the two - thus making one building? O...
22017-11-13 12:43:03 UTCTuanIfan Well it seems the two buildings are interconnected and there is a path between the two. The eastern building is older and is retained, while the left side one was built later as part of the enlargement of the Library.
I also wanted to "build" a single building=yes for the whole thing, bu...
12017-11-10 08:48:53 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Happy to see someone else mapping bus routes!
The later public transport method is not too hard to use in OSM ... I did Relation: 686 (7258397) with some help ... see This too does not have all the stops nor the stop refe...
22017-11-10 09:33:00 UTCSam Wilson Thanks!

I've only just discovered route relations, and that each direction is a separate relation. Have to go back and re-do some I did a couple of years ago.

I wrote a diary entry about the 158, with pics:
32017-11-10 09:35:08 UTCSam Wilson Oh, and I just noticed that you're doing highway=bus_stop as well as public_transport=platform... oops. I'll fix mine up.
12017-11-08 21:01:53 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation 7712903 - highway=service ... does not need to be a relation. It is a simple area that continues under the roof (so the roof is not an inner). It does not need a label .. and the star mart has no role in the relationship. Deleted the relationship and put highway=service on the way. Fix...
22017-11-10 13:19:15 UTCTuanIfan Hi Warin 61,

Thanks for your explanation. Greatly appreciate your help and review of those edits :)
12017-11-01 21:16:53 UTCWarin61 These 'lakes' cannot be relied on to have water .. so the tag intermittent=yes should be used.
12017-11-01 21:09:34 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 537154004 (building=roof) that you added here crosses it self... that is rather confusing and does not really happen in the real world.
Take a look at it.
22017-11-01 21:18:22 UTCTuanIfan Hi Warin61, you're right. I was thinking if it was a footpath connecting two buildings or it was an extension of the church itself. Anw, i'll visit the place again to find out .
12017-10-31 05:19:47 UTCtonyf1 Hi. I don't know if it is a town or a suburb but I suspect that this is a controversial change that may require consultation with the mapping community.
22017-10-31 07:02:58 UTCWarin61 Take a look at the Sydney relation:(5729534) .. that is a suburb.

If you want Parramatta as a city/town etc then maybe look at what has been done for Sydney as a city?

But I'd recommend contact on the Australian mailing list first..

In the mean time I have chan...
32017-11-02 06:05:17 UTCaharvey +1 with discussing this change.

I tried to document the current situation at

In summary, I'm okay with how it is currently, but still think we should distinguish certain suburbs as higher ranking (eg. Parramatta vs Harris ...
42017-11-02 07:05:42 UTCtonyf1 Interestingly, closer to home for me, Dandenong is a town - Node: Dandenong (67340420) and Node: Berwick (2166885522) is a suburb despite being further out. Both were towns before greater Melbourne absorbed them.
12017-10-26 20:47:35 UTCWarin61 Hi,
This moves coastline to back of beach ...
22017-10-29 22:14:39 UTCRichardA Thanks, feel free to fix it. The beach wasn't there at all when I started, nor was the track to get down to it. The polygons got messy with 'trees on the beach' and I did the best I could.
12017-10-19 22:45:29 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation \t7660949 - highway=pedestrian .... with one member as an inner ... is wrong!

I think the area is a tree area .. and should be simply tagged on the way 533296035 as natural=wood and landcover=trees. The relation 7660949 can be deleted.

The relation 7660948 highway=pedestrian ....
22017-10-20 00:28:00 UTCaharvey PS. maybe also try editing in JOSM, personally I find it easier to deal with relations compared with the iD editor.
32017-10-22 10:14:16 UTCClipArtJoel OK, I tried the changes you suggested. Not sure if it's what you wanted exact to how you said.

I have tried JOSM, but find it a bit too complex, that's why I used iD.
42017-10-22 21:31:14 UTCWarin61 Some comments;

The tag "area=yes" is not required.

The Relation: 7670619 has one member Way: 533296035 as "inner". But an inner of what??? Water Park Wet 'n' Wild Gold Coast? Retail Movie World? Village Boundary Oxenford? County Boundary Gold Coast City? State Boundary Que...
52017-10-25 02:33:04 UTCClipArtJoel Yeah ID is a bit different. But I think I got it!
62017-10-25 09:38:06 UTCWarin61 Good Luck - keep mapping.
12017-10-22 01:05:13 UTCWarin61 Hi
Name of Way: Gravesend-Gineroi Road (104487552) looks wrong. I have added alt_name from LPI Base Map of Elcombe Road .. but I think it should be name=Elcombe Road .. as it is on the southern end.
12017-10-21 22:57:14 UTCWarin61 Hi,

What 'alignment' were you trying to fix?

By moving node 4067681594 you have caused the administration boundary of Coffs Harbour to cross itself and not be in the correct place.
I have fixed the admin boundary and done my best around that node to the coast line and the beach relations.
22017-10-22 00:21:43 UTCxdiamondx The previous alignment of the beach was not correct. It crossed itself and I assume someone that worked on it previously did not notice the beach was connected to it which resulted in a pointy (unnatural) section of beach.
12017-10-19 22:35:49 UTCWarin61 Hi
The way 533298379 - farmland that you added crosses it self - along Fogarty's Gap Road. Generates an error in OSMinspector of 'shared segment'. In this instance I thing you can safely remove the appropriate nodes from the way without any impact on what you are mapping.
12017-10-16 22:02:12 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Why do you need to store on the data base where bing hi res imagery is? Looking at way 309325239. The do not contribute any usefull features. And the presence of hi res imagery changes over time.
12017-10-16 21:31:08 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Why do you need to store on the data base where bing hi res imagery is? Looking at way 309325239. Should not you remove these rather than clutter the data base?
22017-10-16 21:53:40 UTCde vries Don't know exactly. But I can think of a few use cases. Outlines like this are are very common around the world at places were you can't expect hires imagery everywhere.
Also note that I didn't add them, I just improved the geometry of them.

Happy mapping!
32017-10-16 21:58:49 UTCWarin61 The presence of hi res imagery changes from time to time .. 'We' now have that 'Digital Globe Premium' imagery that looks to be good most places in png.
12017-10-16 01:47:34 UTCWarin61 Hi,
This changeset looks to have introduced the value 'airstrip'? LINZ defines these as runways. They do appear to be runways - well 4 out of 5 that I have looked at are .. the one missing is not there now, it is a watered field.
Did you introduce this tag 'airstrip' .. or someone else? If it was...
22017-10-16 10:46:22 UTCrcoup Hi Warin61,

Thought I'd submitted this, but either I didn't or it disappeared.

I think (it was a very long time ago), the existing tags caused the map to render with thousands of airplane icons at most zooms, and the renderer folks view was that it needed better tagging. In reality these airst...
12017-10-14 06:48:44 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Questions on way 473880525 - track, grade 4 ..
Firstly this looks to me like it connects some villages .. so it is not just used for forestry/farm things so might be better classified as 'unclassified'?
Grade 4 ? From Bing imagery.. would not think that the grade could be determined from bin...
12017-10-13 21:49:24 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Thanks for entering these while you were there. Some improvements for nest time, unless you have already changed the practice?
These names look like they are all in capitals, they should be lower case maybe with a leading capital letter.
The names should not be descriptive, but the real nam...
22017-10-14 14:41:13 UTCMSF-Fieldco Thanks for the tips. I moved out of Mt. Hagen in early 2016, so I won't be updating the area anymore. It seems that it is in good hands anyway, thanks for keeping the map up to date.
12017-10-12 21:19:08 UTCWarin61 No.

Part, and only part, of these streets are used as the boundaries of Parramatta and Westmead councils. So they have to be, at least, in 2 bits.

Use the LPI Base Map to view this information - the pail dotted lines.

22017-10-13 22:16:47 UTCaharvey @Daryl Radivokevic Unfortuantly the iD editor doesn't warn you when your changes affect a relation, so just try to watch out for how changes will affect relations too. When you go to save your changes in iD it will list what's changed and if it lists relations that you didn't intend to change you ca...
12017-10-05 23:45:33 UTCWarin61 Hi
you have tagged way 489615722 as an abandoned. track. Yet it connects to a village and may be used by the locals as a walking track. I have added a new Way: 530426654 that is close to your abandoned track. See what you think.
12017-10-02 21:29:28 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The changes to
Alfred Cove Marine Park
Alfred Cove Nature Reserve
Milyn Nature Reserve
Pelican Point Nature reserve

conflict with the relation 7619687 Swan Estuary Marin Park by having shared tags.
Humm ... are these part of the Swan Estuary Marin Park? If so then possibly s site rela...
22017-10-03 15:49:54 UTCaaronsta Hi Warin61,
Cheers for your feedback :)
Each individual area has its own individual name, and together these six areas form the Swan Estuary Marine Park.
I tried having a look earlier for a common and approved way tag, but found none. Maybe you know of one and can update the tagging accordingly.\...
32017-10-04 21:32:44 UTCWarin61 Umm I have applied the site relation ... see how that goes?
12017-10-04 21:28:51 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 528707198 is self intersecting. That then causes relation 7622059 to have an intersecting segment.
You should separate the way into 2 ways - an inner and an outer.
12017-10-04 21:24:42 UTCWarin61 The relation 7618908... has an inner touch the outer at node 5140696134.

This should not be done. Suggest that the node be removed from the outer way.
22017-10-05 00:08:08 UTCTheSwavu Inner way only touches outer way a one point. This is a valid multipolygon, no need to edit.
12017-09-26 22:16:20 UTCWarin61 Way 511474998 - named "Vacant'. Surely that is a description? Not a name.
12017-09-26 14:25:04 UTCHarald Hartmann Hello Warin61. At you have tagged `dissused:highway` instead of `disused:highway`, right? #typo
22017-09-26 22:04:56 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Thanks, yes typo.
12017-09-24 11:08:54 UTCaharvey I strongly disagree with this edit.

A feature tagged as source=survey should take precedence over the LPI Base Map and where they differ the ground survey should be what is in OSM.

Take as a concrete example, it was carefully mapped out via s...
22017-09-24 21:57:46 UTCWarin61 Looking at Bunyan Lookout Trail (222408586) (using LPI Imagery) which I also changed from path to track I can clearly see 2 wheel tracks - thus it is clearly a trail, not a path.

The Lost World Trail (222408585) is harder to see with the imagery .. it may be wide enough for a vehicle .. but is ...
32017-09-25 00:19:09 UTCaharvey I've gone ahead and fixed this up in based on my survey of the area yesterday.

Only part of is track, the other part is path.

Even if these were tracks used by vehicles or planned as such, the current ...
12017-09-24 02:45:14 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I have added a few more buss stops in Port Moresby. These are base on satellite imagery only and may need correction!!! You look to be more local than me, if so please edit them.

It would be nice to have the buss...
12017-09-23 05:07:10 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way 350304629 is tagged as both a water way and a highway. You say that the 'trek' goes on top of the river. So physically this way is a river.
If you want to mark a 'trek' then perhaps a route relation can be used in OSM. Or if it is a ferry (or what passes for a ferry) then a ferry route? ...
22017-09-23 19:58:24 UTCMSF-Fieldco Hello. Yes, the road at a certain moment gets into the river for a while. I guess your comment is correct. Please feel free to correct as needed!
12017-09-21 22:25:41 UTCWarin61 HI,
Way 526327518 -landuse=forest

It shares segments. This is not on for simple ways - you have to use a relationship - this one needs one outer way and two inner ways.

LandUSE=forest??? Is it really used for harvesting trees? Or simply covered by trees? If simply covered by trees then landco...
12017-09-20 23:20:26 UTCWarin61 Is the area (way 57745482) really named kunai patch .. or is this a description?
Does it have any historic significance other than being on/near the Kokoda Trail?
12017-09-19 22:36:57 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Welcome to OSM. Some comments?

Moving node 2616016520 has distorted the cemetery - not good. I have fixed this but you might check your other changes?

22017-09-20 00:04:19 UTCTravo656 I am sorry I am only new and have no idea what a node is, I live in Proserpine and was just trying to improve the map in my town. It was missing many things such as the fact that there are two cemeteries one old and one new. If I changed something on the map that I shouldn't have whilst implementing...
32017-09-20 00:58:37 UTCWarin61 1) no need to 'feel sorry'. We all make errors.
2) OSM most elemental thing is a 'node' .. that is a dot, point .. it can be by itself to make a shop/office/monument/ or any simple thing consisting of a 'node'.
A line consist of at least 2 'nodes' that make, in OSM terms, a 'way'.
There are a ...
12017-09-19 22:26:12 UTCWarin61 Framland does not extend to the center of the road?
Again relations - inners should not cross nor share ways with outers.
12017-09-19 02:26:42 UTCWarin61 node 5105512962 - has tag 'ip=ip66' .. what doe that mean? Is it a reference?
22017-09-19 02:43:14 UTCsamuelrussell Ingress protection, an international standard,
12017-09-18 22:14:19 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation 7580789 - farmland;
... has
4 members with the role 'outer'. As 3 of these are within one there is no need for these 3.
Has at least one member with the role inner that shares a segment with the role outer - this is not allowed. See
12017-09-13 22:08:36 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The relation 7570358 (residential) has 2 outer ways that coincide. That is not allowed - I have combined them into a simple way
12017-09-11 22:29:38 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation 7560478 - for your aerial imagery reference... ?

1) What aerial reference? Copyright free? Or specific permission given?

2) You could keep these off the data base by storing them locally as a JOSM layer ...

3) They generate error indication on OSM inspector ... thus my atten...
22017-09-12 00:08:24 UTCaharvey Agree with Warin61 here, a feature in OSM should represent something physically on the ground (I know this isn't always the case, but generally should apply). So if something exists, like the roundabout, map that, but if nothing exists on the ground, that's not suitable for OSM.

I'd suggest use ...
32017-09-12 05:01:01 UTCaaronsta Hi Warin61 and aharvey, this changeset is in response to a message from OSM user hadry. Below is a copy of correspondence between myself and OSM user hadry: Hi Hadry, Thanks for your message, yes these were tagged for the renderer, as barrier=fence makes a clearly visible straight line on Mapnik. ...
42017-09-12 05:09:10 UTCaaronsta Following up from this, originally these were created as the roundabouts themselves formed good starting points, but are way to inaccurate to align the images. It was not put in a local dataset as the images were rectified outside JOSM, where wms tiles were supported but any vector data (such as osm...
52017-09-12 05:13:15 UTCaaronsta It may be appropriate to remove these lines, as I am yet to complete mapping the area and may need to use them again it could be useful to retain. The lines now have no tagged attributes aside from the note=*
62017-09-12 05:20:31 UTCaharvey The issue is you're using OSM to save data really only useful/specific to you. As you can imagine if everyone started using OSM to tag their personal bookmarks it would clutter the database and make editing real map data more difficult.

So I'd like to see these deleted as they don't correspond to...
72017-09-13 14:47:12 UTCaaronsta Thanks for your message aharvey.
The nodes have now been removed.
Uploading it to the live server remained the only efficient way to rectify the images which I am aware of. As I required a free and open wms tile service, which included relatively u...
12017-09-10 21:53:30 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Not well done every where...
Ways 208505436 361107918 422926793 432708439 show up in OSMinspector .with elf intersections. There maybe others of this changeset that need looking at. I have done one, but leave the rest so you can see what has occurred.
22017-09-10 22:32:40 UTCtastrax Hi Warin61 - I am not seeing any issues in OSM Inspector?
32017-09-10 22:47:11 UTCtastrax Actually just my dodgey connection - I think they are all fixed now
12017-09-08 08:41:57 UTCGerdP Hi!
Please check typo oneway=ANZAC Hall
22017-09-08 09:28:14 UTCWarin61 Opps !!!
12017-09-07 21:27:17 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The building (way521899882) that you have added ... you have included in relation Elizabeth Hills (5538037). There is no need to include it separately as it is already surrounded, and therefore included, by this relation.
12017-09-02 22:35:18 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The 'rules' are that multipolygons outer ways cannot touch their inner ways. So these buildings multipolygons generate error messages. Looking at them closely in bing I see that the corners don't quite touch, so I have made them into simple ways. See what you think.
22017-09-03 04:42:17 UTCMartini097 ah okay - my bad. thanks for fixing them :)
12017-08-30 08:36:23 UTCTheSwavu Reverted changesets:


So as to revert change set #51492776, which was a unsuccessful revert that left the data in a bad way.

The above changesets were from mappers trying to fix these errors.
22017-08-30 10:06:50 UTCWarin61 It is a mess. Err still. Probably matches the process that take place inside it! :)

I have changed relation 7112517 from building to a site - as it is a collection of buildings.

I have made some 'buildings' into building:part as they are inside other buildings ... so should be part of them? \...
32017-08-30 22:53:59 UTCSanityChek Warin61
Could you leave it for the moment. I'm in the process of doing a sequence of changes to get it to a target state, and many of the area you identify are on the list, pre-existing from the original model (eg getting rid of the 'pedestrian street at the front). In particular, don't changethe b...
42017-08-31 01:40:51 UTCWarin61 Done. I have added highway pedestrian to the forecourt graveled area this morning.

And I wish you the very best of luck with it!
12017-08-15 23:30:18 UTCWarin61 It is WRONG.

The admin boundary comes the NSW Government LPI. If you want to change the coast line then change that .. not the admin boundary!!!!

22017-08-15 23:39:12 UTCxdiamondx I looked up the "OSM Example" for Harbors - Howth port and it comes with the administrative boundary attached to the coastline.

Do you want me to change it back?
32017-08-15 23:52:30 UTCxdiamondx @Warin61 I fixed the boundary. Sorry for the problem
42017-08-16 00:00:16 UTCWarin61 Thanks
The Admin boundary would be correct. It could be the high tide mark .. in a certain year? Would have to read the legal papers to see. I am against having the admin boundaries use physical features - leads to this kind of problem.

Where the coast line is ... could well be different from t...
52017-08-16 00:43:35 UTCxdiamondx Here's the local government area map -

If you zoom in you can see coffs harbour and it goes north from the breakwater - not following the coastline.
62017-08-29 12:13:00 UTCaharvey I think we need to have a bit more of a discussion on this. If people want the LPI Admin Boundaries they can go to LPI and get it. The LPI boundaries aren't the official legal definition of these boundaries, they are just the LPIs representation.

I think we should do what makes sense for OSM and ...
72017-08-29 23:31:27 UTCWarin61 Coastlines and rivers change over time. And so too do some roads. I'd think a legal boundary that uses a feature will specify a date? Or maybe the date is taken from when the document was made?
By separating an admin boundary from other things in OSM it allows these other things to be altered by m...
12017-08-15 23:45:27 UTCWarin61 How did you come to tag these as "landuse=residential" ?

They are buildings! Tag them building=house in these cases.
22017-08-29 12:06:27 UTCaharvey @Warin61, this is just my opionion here but this is @Nhadaya's first edit to OSM and I feel your comment could have been worded in a slightly more welcoming way.

@Nhadaya welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing, you can check out the beginners guide at
32017-08-29 23:22:04 UTCWarin61 Did not mean to put you off Nhadaya. But this is the second instance I found of this kind of thing occurring .. so I would like to know how you came to tag them as landuse=residential. That may help avoid further confusion?
12017-08-29 22:51:51 UTCWarin61 Hi,
When you do a relationship .. don't put the same tags on the ways making up the relationship.

In this case you have the tags leisure=track and sport=horse_racing on all the ways in the relationship and on the relationship itself. In this case the tags are only needed on the relationship.
12017-08-29 22:35:07 UTCWarin61 The relation 7516802 has overlapping ways. And it looks like other relationships too use these overlapping ways.

Would it not be simpler to revert the relevant changeset? .

I'll revert this one and see what it was like before you changed it.

Ok .. done. Outline is doubled up - fixed. The...
22017-08-30 08:36:14 UTCTheSwavu Reverted changesets:


So as to revert change set #51492776, which was a unsuccessful revert that left the data in a bad way.

The above changesets were from mappers trying to fix these errors.
12017-08-26 22:36:39 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation \t7504613 - Abo station ... not evident in LPI imagery ... umm
Arr there it is - Digital Globe Standard...
OSMinspector says 'touching rings' .. as this is roof outlines I'll just reduce the footprint so they don't quite touch.
12017-08-23 22:14:26 UTCWarin61 Hi
You have Way 479420783 tagged as industrial power plant yet the imagery shows a parking lot. You have that tagged on Way: 71190511. So what it is? If the parking lot is on top of the power plant then use the layer tag to indicate it?
22017-08-24 05:13:31 UTCCloCkWeRX Maybe its confused with Southbank Zone Substation; which is nearby?
12017-08-18 23:47:35 UTCWarin61 The relationship inner way touches the outer way ... that is not allowed.

Is the wood not part of the park?
Yes.. That would mean that it is not an 'inner' in the relationship and the relationship becomes a one member relationship that can be replaced by putting the tags on the outer way.
22017-08-19 07:09:44 UTCjonorossi Thanks Warin61, I spent a good 30mins reading the wiki because I wasn't sure I was doing things right but couldn't really find the info I was after, I then came across OSMI to see if it reported anything and I realised it is batch updated, so fixed some other local problems.

Sorry I don't quite f...
32017-08-19 14:47:35 UTCjonorossi I've resolved the problem. I missed the sign naming the bushland Windemere Road Bushland Refuge, so have now separated the two areas.

I'd still be interested to get a response for my previous question for next time.
42017-08-20 00:22:53 UTCWarin61 In a relation ;

An outer way cannot touch nor cross any other way in the relation.

An inner way can touch another inner way (sometimes OSMi reports this as an error .. but it is technically allowed).

That help?
If you can avoid using a relation - that makes things easier/simpler.
52017-08-20 10:28:26 UTCjonorossi Apoligies for not being clearer, I understand the inner way not touching the outer now, I saw this one reported in OSMi. I was confused earlier because you said " putting the tags on the outer way" for both, however natural=wood needs to be on the inner way.
62017-08-20 11:13:40 UTCWarin61 No need for apologies. Some, at least, is my fault! Much easier over a beer.

What I meant was if the relationship is deleted leaving simple ways, then the remaining way/s get the relevant tags from the old relationship.

If the wood is part of the park then it gets included in the park - it w...
72017-08-20 11:44:39 UTCjonorossi Cheers (with a virtual beer), I think I understand now. For example, you'd use an inner relationship if there was a residential area in the middle of a national park, since it wouldn't actually be national park. All those multiploygon nature reserves with relationships that were automatically import...
82017-08-21 13:21:15 UTCnevw There is a lot to learn about relations and after getting a good understanding of those, you will find most of the rest is much easier.
92017-08-21 14:02:23 UTCjonorossi Thanks nevw, I've seen your username on those complex multipolygons at Nerang Forest before.
102017-08-21 16:39:11 UTCnevw Yes, guilty :)
Most are from CAPAD data and I prefer to add in the form they are gazetted. The parts where they share segments with nearby areas can be difficult to sort out.
12017-08-17 00:16:39 UTCWarin61 Looks like I will have to get the admin boundary from The LPI and reenter it ...

Please .. where you find a way with source LPI that has been simplified using JOSM to an error of <3m ... leave it alone .. unless you have more accurate data.
12017-08-15 23:37:27 UTCWarin61 The building boundary (way in OSM terms) crosses itself ... that is an outside wall crosses over another outside wall ...
I have fixed this - try not to do it again?
12017-08-10 22:58:04 UTCWarin61 Hi again.
Shared ways. Fixed into relation.
The mapping is of the building - not the way it is constructed, nor the configuration of the roof.

Any links to why you don't use a relationship to map building voids?

My reference
22017-08-11 22:46:34 UTCSanityChek Multipolygons can cause issues with particular roofs, etc. Whereas coincident, but non re-entrant, nodes should be OK in most practical usages. And as far as 'levels' is concerned, they could do with some consistency - since building:height is to be avoided, In this instance I was only interested in...
12017-08-09 23:11:57 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way 513763820 - building part level=3 ... generates errors - "duplicate_segment" where you go to make the inner. This should be done as a relation - with inner and outer ways ...
22017-08-10 00:10:14 UTCSanityChek Multipolygon seems to cause more problems than it solves, and particularly when the shape of the building pushes towards the representation used (eg the 'seam' is there in the roof) practicality should win over semantic navel gazing.
12017-08-07 22:45:26 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I think you are mapping the buildings? This is done from the roof outline and they are tagged building= See

The name=* is not used to describe an object - that is a no no. See

22017-08-08 03:55:37 UTCCloCkWeRX I've cleaned up a few of these - thanks for the effort, and welcome to OSM!

You might be interested in using the 'square' tool in ID to make neater outsides, you can access it via right clicking or using 'S' as a shortcut key.

As others have said, if you type 'House' into the search box on th...
12017-08-02 22:56:36 UTCWarin61 Deleting way38931904 has made relations 3898648 and 3935888 open. Did you really mean to do that?
12017-07-28 23:11:30 UTCWarin61 Question:
Do you have permission to use the original image?? Permission compatible with OSM requirements?

OSMinspector reports on relation 7415697 (landuse=residential) that there is duplicate segments. This needs correction. .. see
22017-07-28 23:30:05 UTC93ben Is it fine to use data from Vic Maps ( That's where I have been sourcing it from. HERE Maps already has some of this data. I thought it was OK, but if not I'm happy to remove. Just wanted to keep people updated on what the estate will look like.
32017-07-29 03:40:36 UTCWarin61 That site says " only for your personal use and you may not without our written permission on-sell " .. OSM gives permission to 'on sell' so their terms do not meet OSMs.
Delete all the data that you have entered from it. Sorry.
Best to use the imagery that OSM provides without furthe...
42017-07-29 05:32:05 UTC93ben Ok what I have done is removed everything but the streets that show up on DigitalGlobe. I've left the street names though. Should that be fine? Thanks
52017-07-29 05:38:00 UTC93ben You can see the changes here:
62017-07-29 23:17:44 UTCWarin61 If the names came from Vic Maps then it has to come out.
You can use street signs to get the names .. tedious! I have spent a few days getting them. Mapillary may help ...
12017-07-18 05:32:12 UTCWarin61 Hi
Relation: Norfolk Falls Picnic Area (7285980) will not render as it is only a name.
I have added the tag tourism=picnic_site. I have removed elements with the role 'inner' as these are actually part of the picnic site.

The LPI Base Map is available for coping into OSM, nothing wrong with th...
12017-07-13 23:12:20 UTCWarin61 Hi,
More feed back.
OSMinspector says for relation 6629267;

JOSM validator says ;
non way in multipolygon (5) [the benches I think]
role verification problem -empty role [building?]
intersection between multipolygon ways [foot paths ?]

I say;
12017-07-12 23:20:01 UTCWarin61 Hi,
These ways have the tag area=yes. But that does not say what it is. So ... tag what they are. You might also include additional information - surface?, bicycle?

Way 506012547 has a trace out and back along the same way ... that does not make sense. It goes to Node: 4958070976. I'd remove the...
12017-07-12 23:12:31 UTCWarin61 I'm confused..
The relation 6629267 for Artarmon station has

the tag platform - yep ok
level=1 ... ummm don't think so.
Includes a way as outer .. and that looks to me to be the platform.

And then includes the roof .. which goes outside the outer (this is an error) AND the roof is at leve...
22017-07-13 03:39:39 UTCrpy @Warin61 thanks for the feedback. This changeset was primarily intended to define the relations between existing nodes/ways but agree it's a good opportunity to get it right.

The platform is above ground level (the access tunnel to the west is at ground level) so it's mapped as level=1. I've put ...
12017-07-12 22:13:30 UTCWarin61 HI,
In doing this the relation 2425110 was broken. The following relations also look to be in trouble
there maybe others...
12017-07-11 03:22:25 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I've been working on this treed area.
The Barrington Top NP is not all trees .. nor do the trees stop at its boundaries.
I have added a new relationship 7387469 for this treed area. I will work on it - expand and add holes.
12017-07-07 10:14:44 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Is the way 494067322 you added part of the relation 1530651 - Greenfields Wetlands... or is it simply an adjoining wetland?
As both now carry the same name it is confusing. If it is part of Greenfields Wetlands then way 494067322 should simply be addedto the relation 1530651 (removing the tag...
12017-07-05 22:23:03 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation 7374580 will not render as you have not declared a physical object like building=hospital. Also this relation generates errors - you cannot have crossing outer ways.
map each individual building and neglect the connecting corridors
map it as one building?
do a lot ...
12017-07-05 22:12:36 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way 489761129 - wood. has 'duplicate segments' - from OSMinspector. It also contains areas that are not covered in trees - so not a wood. If it must be mapped then I suggest -
smaller areas.
Or a relation - so that 'holes' can be created inside the outer edge.

I would rather have each va...
12017-06-28 22:20:59 UTCWarin61 Hi
This has broken both relations Black Creek and Swans Crossing.

No professional here ... I pick these errors up on OMSinspector

Think you really need to stop deleting stuff?

22017-06-28 22:40:47 UTCWarin61 Arr I see!
When you joined blackbutt rd together .. you should not have ... a section of it is used by those relations, joining the rd together means long sections of the rd lead these relations off into nowhere.
I have corrected it by separating balckbutt rd back into the required sections.
32017-06-29 00:06:26 UTCLHBfans Thank very much Warin61 for this and also for the link to OSMInspector. It has helped my learning a lot. A couple of questions if you're willing to answer. (1) when you re-separated Blackbutt Rd into 3 constituent parts, there is a longer section from the west 503882407 and a very short middle se...
42017-06-29 10:10:22 UTCWarin61 Humm 'a passion'? Well it was pointed out to me that I had made a few errors. So I fixed them .. since then I have realized the work involved .. so have contributed there where my knowledge/skills permit. I do like to see stuff that is in the data base being rendered - for that to happen well the da...
52017-07-03 00:09:19 UTCLHBfans Thanks very much for that background and extra information. Regards, John
12017-06-27 00:32:00 UTCWarin61 Humm
Relation for Boondall Wetlands;

has no tag for what it physically is ... say natural=wetland
includes an area leisure=common ..

?? is the leisure=common part of this wetland ... then move the tag natural=wetland off the larger outer way on to the relation.
22017-06-27 00:38:33 UTCWarin61 There is also a shared segment in the relation. That needs to be addressed.
32017-06-29 03:20:47 UTCreubot Thank for informing me, I have fixed this in
12017-06-22 01:50:34 UTCWarin61 Relation \t7139156 shares some outer segments - this is a no no.

This is all one building? then each bit is a building:part thing.

Take a look at what I have done here. Deleted the relation. Added a Way: Sofia Restaurant Camberwell (502510513) that is the entire outer of the building and in...
22017-06-26 12:39:34 UTCsixsigmamaps Ok but I have been to this restaurant, several years ago and it not just the one building. As they have got bigger, acquires next door premises and just knocks through a doorway through the wall. Have done that several times. So, whats the deal in this case? Thanks for the help
32017-06-26 23:06:30 UTCWarin61 I have already made the changes.

The buildings were 'semidetached' sharing a common wall between each pair. By knocking through the common wall they become one building. So I have mapped them as one building. Each part of the building can be mapped using the tag building:part=yes if required.
12017-06-26 07:39:48 UTCWarin61 sport=football ???
or australian_football?!
12017-06-26 01:14:44 UTCWarin61 highway=road is meant to be temporary .. as in unknown type of road.
The LPI base Map can be used to determine road types .. these would be tracks/unclassified. Edited. They might be service, service=driveway if you see then that way too.
12017-06-23 03:54:43 UTCaharvey Looks like already existed before, we should keep that way and just update the geometry. Or at the very least delete the old way when adding one with geometry not snapped to the road.
22017-06-23 04:51:37 UTCWarin61 Thanks for finding that. Fixed.
What was I thinking back then?
32017-06-23 07:50:55 UTCaharvey also for

I think it's better to tag a multiuse pitch as sport=netball;basketball than having two overlapping ways, after all there is only one pitch, it just happens to serve two different sports.
42017-06-23 08:32:36 UTCWarin61 Netball and basketball have slight different sizes of court. And where they share a surface they have different line colours too. The line colours can be tagged correctly if they are separate ways ... but not if they are ; separated sports.

I have done one where there are tennis, netball and bas...
12017-06-16 01:43:40 UTCWarin61 hi,
relation 7109264 - building has touching segments. This is better as 2 simple ways ... edited. Note that imagery shows the roof outline, the building walls will be inside those
22017-06-22 23:12:35 UTCWarin61 Relation 7109263 the same comment.

Why are you using relations for these things? KISS.
12017-06-22 01:56:51 UTCWarin61 Relations don't share outer segments. See OSMinspector

These houses look to be separate buildings.
level cannot be both 1 and 2 ..

Needs fixing.
12017-06-21 23:24:13 UTCWarin61 Multipolygons don't do shared ways on outers..
So these might be best as simple separate ways.
Doing this generates a warning - overlapping railways. I think that is ok - platforms do share segments.
22017-06-23 07:44:15 UTCaharvey I'm okay with them being separate ways.

Physically the whole area is one platform, but logically (in terms of the network and naming) each side is a different platform.

So for simplicity, I'm happy with these being separate ways, without the relation with a shared border that way we have tags ...
12017-06-21 22:46:37 UTCWarin61 The 'Slips' ... umm
This is part of a relation - relations don't like shared segments .. so how to 'fix' this?

So what is the 'slips'? What is the source of this name .. and to what does it refer?
22017-06-22 07:41:41 UTCAngyork "The slips" is a historical slip not in use now. That area is called the slips
12017-06-21 22:27:51 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation 7246859 - building=yes;roof ???
Umm is it a roof ...or a building with a roof?

Roof only then building=roof is fine.
If it is a building with roof then building=yes is fine. But no ; for building.

The relation also shares an outer segment. That is a no no, throws error in O...
12017-06-20 23:08:45 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Multipolygon relation 6664382 - the Westfield building. Multiplygons don't like shared segments, I think this would be better as a key building:part.
The landuse declaration would be better as the larger area of Chatswood - on the basis of one feature one element in OSM.
So I have changed th...
22017-06-21 01:35:54 UTCaharvey This looks okay. I'm happy to have landuse=retail a little wider, but I favour keeping landuse polygons no larger than 1 block to avoid overlapping roads etc.
12017-06-20 09:11:50 UTCWarin61 HI
Relation multiploygon 6981082 (a building) shares segments - multiploygons don't do this (unless it is an inner).
Looks like a single building of 3 parts .. so I will delete the relation, and add the 3 parts.
12017-06-20 09:01:32 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The hospital is not just the buildings, but also the grounds - parking etc.
OSM relations object to sharing ways too.
12017-06-20 08:35:48 UTCWarin61 Hi
Deleted Relation: 7338125
It had one member .. another relation .. with the same tags. redundant.
12017-06-18 23:55:49 UTCWarin61 Humm looses a lot because there are no heights . so the tower gains nothing over the rest of the building.
The building:part ... that needs a building=* to sit in .. I have made the outline as a building=church way and then have the tower as a way with building:part=tower ... no multipoygon relati...
22017-06-19 02:56:37 UTCCloCkWeRX Yeah, happy with that, just don't ask me to ride out and survey it again!
12017-06-18 23:28:20 UTCWarin61 Relation 6759112 was better off as 2 separate buildings .. the height details are better that way and relations don't like shared segments.
22017-06-18 23:35:56 UTCWarin61 Arr .. it is one building - 2 heights.
12017-06-18 23:00:22 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Why is this relation 6543467 required?

It is simply 3 areas - that can be 3 individual ways. Easy. And then you have no shared segments in the relation/way.
12017-06-17 04:45:08 UTCWarin61 Hi
Way 54844658 - Rockley Pub Sch .. OSM inspector said duplicate_node. Best to use the LPI base map - that has the legal boundaries. The School does not extend to the middle of the road. I have edited it ..
12017-06-16 01:34:38 UTCWarin61 hi
Relationship 6784124 - wood;
shares segments - would be better as a simple single way?
looks more like scrub to me, some scattered trees and shrubs, a few rocks ...
12017-06-16 00:58:10 UTCWarin61 Hi
Relation 7323994 (wood) has quite a few areas that have no trees. I think that much of these areas will be landuse=forest and would be best tagged that way to indicate that the cover will be trees most of the time with harvesting taking place from time to time. The relation also has ways that s...
22017-06-18 05:13:13 UTCMulti Pass Hi, I am deliberately not marking these areas for a number of reasons:

1) My aim is to complete the traced "outlines" of vegetation area in Tasmania, details such as landuse=forest add more complexity and can be completed at a latter date

2) A lot of these areas are plantations, but ...
12017-06-14 00:24:04 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Node: 4138135421 "man_made"="windmill" "source"="LPI NSW Topographic Map"

Not visible in bing .. labeled 'bore' on topo map .. possibly not a windmill/windpump but a bore? In OSM terms man_made=water_well
12017-06-13 23:44:25 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Node: 2896942815 "man_made"="windmill" does not appear in bing imagery. Is this still here? I have retagged it as windpump to match current OSM tagging. But .. has it been removed?
12017-06-13 03:24:59 UTCWarin61 The name=* should not be used to describe something! Use description=* if you must.

I refer to a couple of 'windmills' .. that should be tagged man_made=windpump.
12017-06-12 09:38:28 UTCWarin61 Lake? Way 373247065 looks like it is a flood plain .. not much water in it most of the time!

Deleted! Entered new smaller way that has water in bing + digital globe. Modified another of your entries - smaller area. Added river between the two.
22017-06-12 09:44:32 UTCmdomnita Thanks for the up. The data was extracted through remote sensing from the Landsat images I had available at that time. Most of the forests and lakes I added in 2015 are extracted with the same methods. I am aware that more recent data is available now and the resolution is higher. Also, I only added...
12017-06-12 09:22:41 UTCWarin61 Looks more like south America...

You are not taking much care with your mapping?
12016-06-26 12:15:12 UTCkrealm All the nodes in this changeset are tagged tourism=campsite but in many cases they rest areas only (no camping is allowed). It also looks like this change set was automated (a practice frequently discouraged by OSM)
22017-05-13 10:40:08 UTCWarin61 The other problem is the unknown source of this changeset.
32017-06-12 02:52:28 UTCWarin61 Node Wanora Downs Rest Area (1811202378) Deleted. Another mapper on the ground has a different name. So what ever the source is, it is questionable.
12017-06-10 03:00:45 UTCWarin61 This changeset has broken the Middle Brother State Forest and Middle Brother National Park relationships.

What was the purpose of this changeset?
What is the source of this changeset?

Make some comment on your changesets??

Removing way 423537725 is what has broken these relationships.
22017-06-25 05:18:04 UTCLHBfans Hello Warin61 & thanks for your message.
I have been away and only got your message a couple of days ago. I am trying to work out what's happened. I had added a couple of tracks in this area. I can see from history that removal of 423537725 seems to be me but I don't know how to pull it up t...
12017-05-28 22:59:00 UTCtonyf1 Hi. It appears you accidentally dragged a node of Mark Place. I have fixed it.
22017-05-29 22:40:56 UTCWarin61 Way 496461665 - wood crosses itself ... this is not good. Ways forming areas should have a clear inner and outer .. when they cross it becomes difficult to determine which bits are inner and outer.
Suggest you 'fix it' so you learn what to do?

32017-06-07 23:11:25 UTCWarin61 I see you have not fixed this.

So i did it myself.

Several things that .. the wood used

nodes on a street -- the wood does not extent this far - they should be separate nodes off the street/footpath!.
The wood includes several swimming pools, backyards...

Deleted. If you want that l...
12017-06-04 09:33:21 UTCWarin61 Looking on Bing imagery most of way 18040883 is used for forestry. Meaning that as some time the trees will be cut down leaving bear earth - so there will be no natural=wood there at all. I suggest that the area is more correctly tagged with landuse=forest?
12017-05-07 09:59:38 UTCWarin61 This source does not give you;
drinking water


You have also used the name to give a function. As some of these areas have a name (LPI Base Map) there is a problem here.

Another problem .. are these parking areas? that is what the renders are picking up on. OS...
22017-05-07 13:44:34 UTCRhubarb I drive up and down the Hume Highway a few times a year. I use aerial imagery (in this case LPI NSW from 2016/07/13) to draw the geometry, and my own notes and photos for other details.
In this case, fee, toilet, drinking water, hgv access, and other information was from survey / local knowledge (s...
32017-05-07 13:47:11 UTCRhubarb * I've given the name to give a function to more identify which area is for cars, and which is for caravans / hgv - as many rest areas here have separate parking areas adjacent to each other. But I can see how this could be in error.
42017-05-07 22:37:05 UTCWarin61 Three things;
1) HGV/caravan .. this in present OSM terms should be done using the access tags .. IIRC you have hgv=yes .. but nothing banning other things .. so should add access=no to ban everything else. I'd be tempted put this on the road/parking? This should then work for GPS navigation maps. ...
52017-05-25 06:29:12 UTCRhubarb Sorry for the late reply, have been busy.
1) The truck parking areas in most of these rest areas are built for trucks (solid long road, lots of bins, nothing else), however there are no signs restricting access to other vehicles. Cars often use truck parking areas for quick power naps, etc.
2) I'v...
62017-05-28 00:53:43 UTCWarin61 OK... found a method for the parking areas ...

So on a parking feature add
capacity:long=yes/no/number for long cars or cars with trailers

capacity:hgv=yes/no/number for heavy goods vehicles (long and wide)

72017-06-03 23:15:53 UTCWarin61 Hi, some more details for 'truck parking' things..

There is a description tag .. description=truck parking ? Might be better than using the name tag?

The areas that cannot be used by trucks might be better to target with hgv=no .. and then assume all the others are usable by trucks?

12017-05-29 22:48:42 UTCWarin61 Way 496413674 crosses itself..

You have a small number of 'issues' that should be fixed ... see
12017-05-29 22:42:23 UTCWarin61 Way 496396375 .. crosses itself.
22017-05-30 05:47:54 UTCWoodWoseWulf You've marked The Willow's entire grounds as a building.
12017-05-29 07:41:22 UTCWarin61 Way 338457447 ... entered as a 'cycleway'.
Cycleways are not appropriate here - it is a path used by mtbs .. so highway=path, bicycle=yes. If you want you could add a mtb route. Part of this path is used by walkers and horse riders.
12017-05-25 10:50:03 UTCWarin61 If you add a route declaration of mtb to these they will show up on!-34.4744!147.5406

With profile data ...
12017-05-25 06:55:18 UTCWarin61 Nup.. OSM Inspector reports \tintersecting segments ... where the way crosses itself.
12017-05-25 06:43:41 UTCWarin61 Relation 5626761 - beach ..not closed, duplicated segments..
12015-09-01 10:49:48 UTCaharvey I'm removing because I'm fairly certain there is no picnic_site at the exact location of the node, and there is a better positioned picnic_site nearby which is probably what this node was meant to map.
22017-05-20 09:08:55 UTCWarin61 tagged they have a copyright message on their web site ... do you have permission to use their data??

Node: Gunnedah South RA (316587591) is far off the highway .. and well away from anything like a campsite .. deleted.
12017-05-20 00:15:08 UTCWarin61 Names should not contain the agent details.
12017-05-20 00:10:58 UTCWarin61 name= should be in the local language ONLY
Other languages can be added using name:ru=* where ru is a 2 letter language code for the language in use.
12017-05-19 04:12:36 UTCWarin61 Katoomba St numbering looks to be in error ... compare it to LPI Base Map ...
.. and to mapped shops ..

I have corrected it around some surveyed shops.
22017-05-19 04:14:13 UTCWarin61 So far .. only near Bendigo bank...
12017-05-18 07:50:16 UTCWarin61 Bus Stop Node: 4230081852 is located in the middle of a residential block ... no bus stop there. Moved it to a more appropriate location ... by my physical survey with GPS.
12017-05-16 08:46:25 UTCWarin61 Part of a river...

Moved - to discover already in OSM .. deleted.
12017-05-16 08:40:56 UTCWarin61 Looks like the front of someones yard!!

12017-05-11 22:14:05 UTCtonyf1 Hi. Welcome to OSM. I am surprised that there is really a Reserved forest and a standing stone here. Can you provide more information? Map features which are unverifiable are at risk of deletion.
22017-05-11 22:57:43 UTCAnnabelle Daniel Hi Tony,

The standing stone is there because I put it there with a crane. It's at the very end of my backyard. The triangular forest is fenced off, quarantined as Sydney Rail corridor property and filled with native vegetation. There is significant local wildlife living there, including bird and ...
32017-05-13 00:22:04 UTCtonyf1 Thanks for the reply. I think that there are problems with the Reserved forest. You have mapped it as a complex re-entrant polygon. The map rendering software has difficulty rendering this and shows a sliver of green little bigger than a car. Also, I think "Reserved forest" is a descriptio...
42017-05-13 05:51:48 UTCAnnabelle Daniel Thanks! I'll try and fix it as it is larger than a car - but oddly shaped. Like a wedge with a blunt end.
52017-05-13 07:14:51 UTCWarin61 The landuse tag is for the human use of the land, so a forest would be used to produce wood for example ... I think you want to tag it natural=wood ... (as close as OSM gets to landcover=trees).
If you want to add 'information' to the feature .. then possibly use comment=reserved forest ... and I'...
12017-05-13 07:06:33 UTCWarin61 Removal of ways 465064159 and 377683089 has left relation 5626761 - beach- unclosed... would you like to fix this?
12017-05-11 23:12:17 UTCWarin61 Altered relation 7165413 - residential. Removed crossing ways.
I used the LPI base map that has the legal boundaries of the residential properties. There has been talk of better mapping by mapping residential areas by blocks... the road ways are landuse=highway.... I'm not going that far .. but I...
12017-05-10 01:10:06 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation 5333614 - swimming pool ... that looks to be 2 pools - one for sport - marked lanes. The other for ? wading? depth might be a good indicator here. I have made this into 2 separate ways - both pools but one sport .. and left the other.
The 'other' looks to have a circular roof .. a su...
12017-05-06 23:25:49 UTCWarin61 relation \t6760414 residential .. shares a segment. I have removed the shared segment, combined the two remaining ways - thus making a simple single way .. and now deleted the relation!
Try to keep things simple?
12017-04-22 22:29:39 UTCWarin61 This relation/polygon 7170268 (beach) is not closed.
22017-05-06 23:16:33 UTCWarin61 Still not closed .. deleting.
12017-05-06 01:40:39 UTCWarin61 Error - duplicated node in way 491460496 - building.

Is it id that makes these errors so easy to do? Or is it something you are doing?
I'm a JOSM user so i don't know.
These 'errors' appear on OSMinspector so you can find and fix your 'own' 'errors'
12017-05-03 06:14:58 UTCWarin61 Did you real mean to add 4 ways to the admin boundary for relationship 6246037 - suburb of Macgregor?
22017-05-03 09:58:53 UTCAlexOnTheBus Oops - that would have been me not paying attention when using Shift-R to copy bus route relation tags. Apologies for that (and thanks to TheSwavu for fixing up my blunder).
12017-05-02 04:02:36 UTCWarin61 Quite some time ago I sent Jeffery a message on one of his changesets about adding fictitious bicycle infrastructure. Apparently he wants to indicate a bicycle route .. I did inform him of how to do that.
He has not made any recent edits.
12017-05-02 02:51:28 UTCWarin61 Imagery can be used to add surfaces, structures.
Parks may not be easily detected from imagery unless you have additional information

The LPI Base Map has additional information .. particular regarding legal boundaries, parks etc.
12017-05-02 02:41:00 UTCWarin61 Welcome to OSM.
You moved node 3985397985 by over 100 meters, this has removed a section of the LCR National park.

I have moved it back and disconnected it from the 'wood'.

Will need some time to check your removal of node 3993045108.
12017-04-20 22:58:22 UTCWarin61 Removed crossover and connection to roundabout.

Don't know that this is an official 'park'.
12017-04-19 23:06:46 UTCWarin61 Removed duplicate segment from relationship 7166553 wood. This shares boundaries with the Jilliby State conservation Area .. why? I would remove the tagging of wood on the conservation area as the wood would not stop at its boundaries ...
22017-04-26 02:39:24 UTCWoodWoseWulf Cheers, I don't know how I missed that. I'll come back and further refine this area as per your feedback later :).
12017-04-19 23:00:19 UTCWarin61 Relationship 7165413 residential has touching rings ... if you look at the LPI Base map you can remove the touching.
12017-04-19 22:55:39 UTCWarin61 Your way 487677999 grassland crosses it self. It should b+e corrected.
12017-04-18 22:04:11 UTCWarin61 Way 475592320 crosses over itself. So it does not render well ... OSM inspector calls it a 'self intersection'.
22017-04-18 22:46:38 UTCaharvey Thanks for noting this, it looks like it's happened as a result of I'll move the discussion over there.
12017-04-17 06:18:23 UTCWarin61 Errr ...
Removed a node from relation 6987348 - parking .. node is on a street outside the parking area. This now looks reasonable.

Way: 475189238 - parking ... looks bad. Please take a look at it. I have removed some nodes from it .. one of them the same one as the above parking relation.

22017-07-24 04:12:29 UTCCloCkWeRX Fixed
12017-04-17 06:08:49 UTCWarin61 HI,
Way 487105547 - residential has a shared segment where you go to/from a section of Harrison Reserve.
Shared segments are not good in OSM.. some renders get confused by them.
It is not necessary to exclude other landuses inside residential areas ... one of the few less picky things in OSM.
12017-04-15 23:03:08 UTCWarin61 A better way of mapping inner voids is to make a relation. Using a single way can confuse renders as two sections of the way occupy the same space. Made into relation 7160595
12017-04-14 21:46:02 UTCWarin61 Way 330452626 - residential ...
2 areas that you have joined together by a line of 0 width.
This confuses renders ....
It should be drawn as 2 separate ways.
I have split it .. and made a new way 486873385 to solve this problem. Where ever you make a line of 0 width .. it should not be p...
12017-04-13 22:18:58 UTCWarin61 Changing way 486401910 has resulted in braking relation 7154856.
12017-04-12 22:46:41 UTCWarin61 Way 485880145 Jasper State Forest is self intersecting. To make sens this needs to be a relation. I have changed it to relation 7154856

Question .. Is this area used for forestry? then it should be tagged as landuse=forest ... and if that is the case, as at some time the trees will be harvested t...
12017-04-12 22:33:12 UTCWarin61 Way \t485973852 is self intersecting... don't do this. Changed to relation 7154847
12017-04-12 22:27:55 UTCWarin61 Way 470864541 (Crocodile Park) has 3 nodes all in the same location. Corrected. In the past this way also had self intersection.
12017-04-11 21:49:06 UTCWarin61 Way 485847421 CBD North crosses itself.
Changed to Relation: CBD North (Proposed) (7152397) with 1 outer and 2 inners.
12017-04-10 00:05:32 UTCWarin61 You moved Tom's entry of Node: Malaita Point (856589030) to a more appropriate place behind the lifeline. However, now with the LPI basemap, I think this should be more to the west. And the present location of this node could be retained as Eagle Hawk Lookout.
22017-04-10 00:15:26 UTCWarin61 cliff line .. not lifeline!
32017-04-10 08:16:17 UTCmrpulley If you stay behind the cliff then it is a lifeline!
These nodes were positioned from GPS, with names from the nearby signs. The positions of Malaita Point and Eagle Hawk Lookout on the LPI map are incorrect. (If you look at the LPI imagery, you can just make out the car park for the actual location...
12017-04-08 21:44:52 UTCWarin61 This has removed the outer way for your past relation 6099322 -wetlands.
I am deleting relation 6099322.
12017-04-08 02:16:18 UTCWarin61 Hi
The sunbath track has a landslip + numerous tree falls > .3m dia. I have tagged it disused and broken it around the landslip. Not safe now, and vanishing in the future :(

I have also added some details to Medlow Bath + the hydro. The hydro to me looks very unfriendly to walkers that come ...
12017-04-06 00:53:03 UTCWarin61 Relation 7072610 has 2 ways with role outer. OSM indicated errors?
One of these ways is inside the other.
Both ways share segments with each other.
Suggest remove the smaller way from the relation. If the smaller way is not part of the farm land then still remove it and rerun the relation outer...
12017-04-04 09:43:53 UTCWarin61 The members of the relation 6574556 for Redbank Plains have no role ... same for a few of your other relations...

I have added roles to this and a few other of your entered relations.

Side note A boundary cannot come from bing...
12017-04-03 02:23:10 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The LPI Base Map has West Tipla Rd as tertiary ... and the East Tipla Rd as secondary .. any objections to changing this?
Note .. have to add East Tipla Rd to OSM! ...
22017-04-03 04:14:41 UTCcleary I think it is probably outdated information in LPI map. I haven't driven all the way on the west road but the east road is very average in standard. Central Darling Shire Council rates the west side as a main road (MR) for which it would get State funding (therefore possibly a secondary in OSM) and...
32017-04-03 04:17:32 UTCWarin61 P.S A relevant doc

Note the 'road description' not road name.
42017-04-03 04:25:27 UTCWarin61 Ha crossing info ... both on to the same view though.
12017-03-26 03:43:40 UTCWarin61 Relation 5748513 has no outer way .. one inner way .. but no outer boundary.
22017-04-02 22:34:57 UTCWarin61 Deleted. relation 5748513 .. no feed back.
12017-03-24 00:24:55 UTCWarin61 Relation \t5607069 has no tags...
the inner looks like a residential area (bing)

But has the same tags as the outer - protected area ...

Possibly the relationship should have the protected tags, and the inner should be landuse=residential???
22017-04-02 22:29:52 UTCWarin61 No communication.
Changed to what I think it should be.
12017-04-01 23:02:53 UTCWarin61 Relation 7120549 - wood .. has touching rings.. the oval and the parking area.

Wot I'd do? make it a simple way .. include the oval and parking area and the road in like you have for the power station.. ?
22017-04-02 00:33:29 UTCWoodWoseWulf Well spotted and fixed now :)
32017-04-02 01:50:12 UTCWarin61 Spotting is easy as NSW is free of area errors.. use

Also use this to see other 'errors' of your own

Good Luck
12017-04-01 23:27:27 UTCWarin61 The gate you added .. with closing at 4 pm (16:00 hours) .. when does it open????
12017-03-25 22:57:47 UTCWarin61 In removing way 238014906 you have made relation 3207606 (a beach area) into a simple way .. so it is no longer an area .. so the beach is effectively no longer there.

Did you really mean to do this?

22017-04-01 23:06:36 UTCWarin61 Removed relation ... no more beach.
12017-04-01 22:46:45 UTCWarin61 Deletion of ways 138545239 and 138545236 means relation 1865554 is now not closed.
So I have deleted the relation...
12017-04-01 22:42:16 UTCWarin61 Relation \t99328 has no tags... deleted.
12017-04-01 22:20:02 UTCWarin61 Crossing ways generates errors...
Way 7114395 - grassland crosses from inner to outer ways ..
I have changed it to a relation 7127339.
12017-04-01 01:17:36 UTCWarin61 This removed the from and too ways from the turn restriction relation 6896875.
This removed the from way from the turn restriction relation 6896877.
And possibly others at this intersection?
12017-03-31 03:06:05 UTCWarin61 You have removed from Relation 1676980 - forest the way 37523769 that forms its outer .. so the forest is no longer there. And that way no loner exists... so I am deleting the relation. No more forest.
12017-03-31 02:45:17 UTCWarin61 Opps deletion of way 98544635 has removed the outer for relation 1412923 wood.
So I have deleted the relation ...
12017-03-29 02:16:01 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Where did the name for Polia Road come from?
The LPI base map show this as 'Old Pooncarie Road'.
22017-03-29 02:18:59 UTCWarin61 Arr .. the southern section has that name while the northern section has OPR.. correcting.
12017-03-29 02:01:33 UTCWarin61 Hi,
You have way 322193363 tagged as a private track .. the LPI base map shows this as a tertiary road ... several other roads are shown out here on the LPI Base map too. I'll put those in.
Arr came to your way 259154081 - tagged as driveway private yet LPI shows it as tertiary. Similar for way 3...
22017-03-29 04:11:24 UTCcleary I have driven on many roads in far west there but not that one, nor the roads to Cymbric Vale and WIlandra. From the Barrier Highway, those roads look like private roads and I think they had gates or cattle grids and there were definitely no signs to suggest public roads. I traced the tracks from Bi...
32017-03-29 04:15:44 UTCcleary Further comment. I remember driving on Waterbag Road and I recall that the track to Cymbric Vale was just a track, didn't look anything like Waterbag Road (which I think was graded and reasonable gravel suface,) and there was no sign to indicate public access was permitted to Cymbric Vale.
12017-03-28 05:19:14 UTCWarin61 Fixed multipolygon 7102520. The ways should not touch ... Also added landcover=grass tag.
22017-03-28 08:40:35 UTCWoodWoseWulf Thank you as always for proofing :)
12017-03-24 06:43:28 UTCaharvey How did you check for duplicates?

eg. you added but it already existed as

I've been seeing a lot of duplicated features from your Base Map imports.
22017-03-24 08:24:39 UTCWarin61 I checked for duplicate nodes .. not certain that I did check ways (too long ago to recall) .. and probably not relations. This change set 3/8/16 so 'my' node would have been that date .. relationship dated 9/7/16 so ~ a month previous.

Humm I did a recheck some time ago on duplicates .. but aga...
32017-03-24 08:50:30 UTCWarin61 Humm scanning ... found 1 add the day before by you .. from Imagery .. deleted mine and add the name from the base map.
Another is displaced by 200 metres .. I'll do some more looking tomorrow (and think about the displacement).
42017-03-25 00:15:36 UTCWarin61 Ok .. found 7 that I have deleted. About half of those are mine.
Did not answer your question of how I checked for duplicates .. I think at that time I was using the OSM cycle map .. that appeared to have the best rendering of camp sites ... but it may have been slow to render new data .. thus I m...
52017-03-25 06:46:49 UTCWarin61 Over 187 camp sites manually scanned. 78 deletions .. not all camp sites but most of them. Not all 'mine'. 230 objects modified .. some 'camp_sites' to pitches as the camp site is already tagged .. again not all mine.
62017-03-27 01:20:46 UTCaharvey > So these duplicates you have noted ... were they only campsites? Or anything else?

I keep finding issues across all your LPI Base Map imports.

eg. I just deleted since it was already mapped as

72017-03-27 02:03:09 UTCWarin61 I have looked back at my lookout files (I did not bother with check my old campsite files .. but I'd not think I was consistent from one feature type to another .. hopefully improving all the time) .. and cannot find a duplicate for tuckers lookout ... so the checking was done. Did something else go...
82017-03-27 02:12:50 UTCWarin61 Looking back at my old files for lookouts ... each node carries a tag "fixme=check for duplictes and web links" .. and each node was manually checked against the osm map background for the duplicate.. then those were uploaded to OSM having deleted each fixme tag as they were done. However...
92017-03-27 03:25:12 UTCaharvey The existing node has been there for the past 4 years

Next time it would be great if you could post on the mailing list your intention to do an import and we can check the process to make sure things like this aren't missed.

Another one I jus...
102017-03-27 05:25:45 UTCWarin61 Arr .. I see now.
What you are deleting are displaced things.

My experience with LPI data suggest in many instances it is better than the data in OSM despite the mappers attribution of 'source=survey' or 'source=gps'. How do I know that ? In the instances of roads i have used the Strava heat ma...
112017-03-27 07:50:21 UTCaharvey Not all data is equal. Different types of features like roads vs lookouts could dramatically vary in accuracy, even within the same feature types, the accuracy in the LPI Base Map can and does vary.

Since we don't know the where each feature in the LPI Base Map came from, I don't think it should ...
12017-03-26 21:49:59 UTCWarin61 Are these 'cycleways'? I think these would be more of a mtb track .. and those would be better tagged as a 'path' 'unpaved' with a relation 'route' 'mtb'
If tagged as I suggest they would then appear on!-32.5441!151.1371 as a route - highlighted with a rig...
22017-03-26 23:38:10 UTCGavinX Can't get to this right now. Can fix in a week or so, however feel free to amend.
12017-03-26 03:51:19 UTCWarin61 Removal of way 401738944 has made relation 6026831 multipolygon public land have no outer way... making the multipolygon wrong.

So why did you remove this way?
22017-03-26 05:27:48 UTCWarin61 1)
You can respond to this comment on your changset by;

a) Going to the changeset

b) loging in - use your OSM password.

2) I don't know how you edit .. I use JOSM and there I can download any OSM feature and look a...
32017-03-26 07:23:49 UTCneilmny This is my first comment via this method I hope I am doing it right.
I also use Josm and keep the version updated.
I don't recall altering the state forest boundary. I only realigned the ANP. Sections of the ANP were replaced by merging from boundary data imported from shape files but I checked th...
42017-03-26 07:37:15 UTCWarin61 It is very easy to miss things that have uses in multiple relationships. I think that is what happened here.
This particular relationship is puzzling .. I have left a note on their changeset.
As for the forest .. possibly that is obsolete? However, in Queensland some National Parks are also used...
12016-03-05 10:32:25 UTCEwen Hill That actually is the Alpine National Park uploaded from Data.vic apart from the top north due to size.
22017-03-26 06:01:13 UTCWarin61 This Relationship 6026831 - multipolygon does not have any tags that will make it render ...
I think it would be safe to delete, the outer way has been removed by someone else so restoring it will take some work .. and as it has no effect on the map probably not worth the effort?
12017-03-26 03:41:32 UTCWarin61 Relationship 6794412 taged breakwater;

only has inners. It should have at least one outer.

Ways touch one another .. not good in a multipolygon!

I have made this into a simple way.
12017-03-26 03:27:27 UTCWarin61 No roles on Goodna either .. could you check the rest?
12017-03-26 03:25:13 UTCWarin61 You forgot to add roles for the members of Redbank...
12017-03-26 03:23:25 UTCWarin61 You forgot to add roles to the members of relationship for Brookwater.
12017-03-23 22:49:14 UTCWarin61 Why layer=1 for these buildings?

At the moment relationship 6592787 has 3 of these buildings .. all layer=1 ... and they over lap one another ... so in order to 'fix' the problem I'd like to understand the use of the layer tag here.
22017-03-23 23:01:33 UTCLeon K Hi, not sure about the layer tag to be honest, I can't remember a specific reason for it. The reason for the three spearate parts is they are different heights and colours. It's part of the 3d tagging.
The layer isn't associated with that but might be because of the underground car park.
32017-03-25 10:40:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Better to model the different chunks as building:part I reckon; and the building 'footprint' as a building.

A bit hard to get them all in a relation properly with ID; dunno about other editors
42017-03-25 11:01:36 UTCWarin61 Interesting and dynamic architecture is hard to map... particularly from satellite imagery! :) Don't think any of the 2D editors handle it well. Now if we modeled the world in solid modeler? :)))
My thinking at the moment is to map it by the roof over laps .. at least that is visible from the image...
52017-03-25 11:14:12 UTCLeon K I've been there plenty of times, only issue I can see was one overlap, which i've just removed. Hopefully that solves whatever error you're seeing.
62017-03-25 11:16:06 UTCLeon K A single building and building parts might work better, might look into that. 3D tagging isn't so bad, eventually you learn how to see the result from the tags.
72017-03-26 00:41:27 UTCWarin61 Thanks Leon. I'll have a look at it later .. There should be a method of tagging the roof too so that they don't clash.
12017-03-25 23:08:47 UTCWarin61 Relation 2420705 contains a way 181488836 with the same tags - adding nothing to the map. I have removed it from the relationship.
12017-03-25 03:33:37 UTCWarin61 Way 482161878 (wood) crosses itself .. a figure 8.
12017-03-25 00:08:41 UTCWarin61 I have made some changes to Camp Coutts Scout Camp. You have a number of nodes inside the area with similar tags. I assume the nodes are individual pitches so have retagged them camp_site=pitch as per a proposed tagging scheme. I have also add an alternate name Coutts Camp from the LPI Base Map.
12017-03-23 23:07:09 UTCWarin61 Relation 4246123 is now not closed ... it was closed yesterday.... Possibly the ways you deleted were used by this way? ?? History says you were the last to touch it.
22017-03-23 23:27:37 UTCFvGordon I have just sorted the members of this boundary relation (without removing or adding any members). The JOSM relation editor now shows a closed ring.
32017-03-23 23:53:10 UTCWarin61 OK. I'm using OSM Inspector to try and get the errors down.. easier than using the error files from making a map. Once those are down I'll try using the error files again.
12017-03-23 23:13:35 UTCWarin61 Hi,
By making a new node and moving the boundary by 0.2 m the OSM inspector error is removed .. very little effect in the real world. It dose create a 'gap' of 0.2 metres. .. cheating I know.
12017-03-23 02:34:12 UTCWarin61 Err multipolygon 5866031 has no tags to say what it is! ... Its members also cross one another. The ways that from the multipolygon are tagged area=yes .. redundant.

I have removed the area tags, resolved the ways into a simpler system and added the tag natural=scrub to the multipolygon.
22017-03-23 03:00:12 UTCGlenhope1 ok. good
12017-03-23 00:20:46 UTCWarin61 This 'meadow' incorporates buildings, and structures and trees .. not all a meadow. And the relationship is not closed now ... relationship 6287756. So I have deleted the relation.
12017-03-23 00:09:47 UTCWarin61 This building (way 481787267) crosses over it self ... and that is not right. I'll leave it to you to fix.
22017-03-24 01:39:15 UTCWoodWoseWulf 👍 fixed, cheers.
12016-12-01 00:51:16 UTCWarin61 Errr ... highway=cycleway is not correct.

Use hightway=path (or track if wide enough to take a car/4WD) and add mtb=yes and/or bicycle=yes. You could even use a route relation ..
However .. read

Note: Best to respond to the questions you h...
22017-03-03 00:03:13 UTCWarin61 No response for 3 months mapping activity to connect unconnected paths ... leaving it this way is not good.

So I may as well add things that were deleted ... unless you respond real soon?
32017-03-22 05:31:43 UTCWarin61 Ok. Corrections made -
removed highway=cycleway.
added relations for mtb routes.

Added paths from strava.
Added catch all for strava heat map trails - no names but a generic for the park as a whole.

These now display on!-35.1145!147.3048

Note ...
12017-03-21 00:05:52 UTCWarin61 Hi again
Relation: 2308145 tagged waterway=riverbank ... is not closed ... and looks to contain ways 172860359 and 172860350 that are both tagged (correctly I think) as wetlands.
I think the wetlands need to be made into relationship ... so that the ways can be cut up so they can be shared betwee...
22017-03-21 00:32:57 UTCTheOldMiner I agree with your comments. I made these additions back in 2013. My changesets appear to have been damaged around the areas of the wetlands. There are more problems all the way down to Mackay. I am not 100% why, as they were all mapped from bing using josm. There is another user fixing the problems...
32017-03-21 07:07:14 UTCWarin61 Finding out who did what .. err .. and then once found are they still around, and amenable to working on fixing it?
Rather it were fixed .. as time and inclination allows. This is not my area of vast knowledge in either OSM nor familiarity with the land .. I have been through a few times but not s...
42017-03-23 06:03:12 UTCnevw I am likely to be 'the other user' but have been unable to fix any due to not being familiar with the area and limited ability to interpret the Bing imagery for the wetland areas so I have abandoned my efforts to fix. There is the following data that could likely assist but as far as I know we don't...
52017-03-23 10:07:03 UTCTheOldMiner No problems. I will revist the area virtually other the next few weeks. Let you know when I am done. To see if all the errors have be rectified. I had the same issues around Mackay a little while back. Maybe when they did that big rework of the map
62017-03-23 11:21:41 UTCnevw Thanks to TheOldMiner
These are the main areas
12016-03-17 00:51:10 UTCPeter W34 The bridges on Marlborough Sarina Road or any other road, should not be changed to service or any thing different to what the rest of the road class is. This wrecks the routing for all the people who use OSM for in car navigation, also all roundabouts should have junction = roundabout tag.
22016-03-17 03:29:08 UTCTheOldMiner I am not sure who this is and what authority you have make such comments without a spread of manners, something I intend to raise with the mailing list, it may be a good idea to not only provide an example but discuss the issue. There maybe a litigimate reason.
32016-03-17 10:43:22 UTCPeter W34 I apologize for my bluntness, I am fixing many of the errors in the map using Osmose. I was disappointed to find someone had changed these two bridges on Marlborough Sarina Road to service road, if the bridge is narrow put lane=1 instead. If you look at the history of the Funnel Creek bridge you wil...
42017-03-20 23:38:04 UTCWarin61 Error .. confuses me!
Relation: Develin State Forest (1481424)
Relation: Goodedulla National Park (1481425)

Are both the same! The same area should not be a national park and a state forest? Could you look at this please (I hope you are more locale than me).
Reason why I am looking here is t...
52017-03-21 00:38:44 UTCTheOldMiner I would be careful with starting a conversation with the word Error. I worked for the Queensland Department of Natural Resources for 6 years in the land management area. Simply, it is possible to historically have state forest, natural park, land leases and many forms of tenure coexisting in a laye...
62017-03-21 06:59:41 UTCWarin61 As a NSWelshman I find the idea of an area being both a National Park and a State Forest strange in this country. However if that is the case then it should remain so in OSM. I have updated the web links for the Goodedulla_National_Park. Oh and the tag natural=forest to natural=wood as that is the p...
12017-03-20 23:18:24 UTCWarin61 Way 481460629 was crossing it self. I have removed the crossing and added detail from the LPI Imagery and added the source tag.
12017-03-17 22:21:29 UTCWarin61 Errors on relationship Lake Cakora;Cakora Lagoon (7017874, v1).

Multiple names ... the name tag should only carry one name. If there are other names .. then use alt_name,

Next .. the ways of this relationship intersect. It looks to me like you ...
22017-03-17 22:25:43 UTCWarin61 Humm looking at the history .. I would remove the relationship. The northern way I would tag as the lake, and I'd reapply the southern way as the lagoon.
12017-03-17 06:02:33 UTCWarin61 Congratulations.
You have removed a race track.
22017-03-17 17:10:51 UTCEdSS Hi Warin61,
The entire Skellatar Park area is tagged as sport horse_racing and all fences etc seem to be there. Is there something important missing from the map?
32017-03-17 21:55:38 UTCWarin61 The sport is on a race track .. where is the tack?
Relation: 6422036 is tagged as leisure=track.. had outers and inners .. now has one outer .. that is not closed. So the relationship is broken

Possibly this was broken before your changes? Don't know... but you certainly have not 'improved' it...
42017-03-18 15:14:47 UTCEdSS I appreciate the landcover comment. The original mapping was flagged as having a problem that would eventually prevented proper rendering. Skellatar Park and OSM are very lucky to have someone so concerned with excellent mapping. I look forward to your revised version that will be even better tha...
12017-03-17 05:48:33 UTCWarin61 2 relationships .. contain no information.
3rd relation has both buildings as roofs and shop convenience.
All relationships deleted.
One way is now tagged as the roof. The other way is tagged as building retail with sop convenience. Added node - amenity=fuel, operator Woolworths.
12017-03-16 04:32:12 UTCWarin61 Wetland relation 6955233 has errors... you have
2 ways tagged as outer ways .. that is the outside of the wet land ... yet one of them lies inside the other .. so which is the outer and which is the inner of the wet land ???

Or are they both wetland???? I don't know.
Way: 440320931 lies alon...
22017-03-16 20:38:46 UTCWoodWoseWulf Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention, I must have had a brain fluff or something while editing. I've fixed it now.
12017-03-15 21:47:21 UTCWarin61 Relation: Georges River Council (6205809) Not closed ... was closed before your change.
12017-03-15 21:37:09 UTCWarin61 And you have now unclosed the relationship area...fix it yourself . Getting tired of these!
12017-03-15 01:42:20 UTCWarin61 Not closed again... I have closed it. But not well matched to the actual boundaries!!!!

This boundary is not visible in the Base map .. you should use the Admin boundaries. Suggest you fix all the associated council boundaries as one changeset ... I would use JOSM.
12017-03-15 01:30:28 UTCWarin61 Opps "Slap Up Road" .. tagged a highway=stream ...corrected to highway=unclassified .. as per LPI base map.
12017-02-12 01:40:32 UTCWarin61 The 'Epping Station Concourse' begins and ends outside the 'building' .. so it is not a corridor. Retagged footway, tunnel=building_passage.

22017-03-13 09:24:17 UTCWarin61 Nodes 3281331663 and 3281331666 are highway=elevator ... and you should not use the name tag to state a function. Corrected.
12017-03-08 06:18:23 UTCWarin61 Frying Pan Road not secondary!!!
At most it would be 'unclassified .. but on the LPI base map is is a track. Retagged as a track -
12017-03-08 03:26:44 UTCWarin61 1) The LPI Imagery cannot be the source of an administration boundary ... I think you mean the LPI Base Map ?
2) The relationship is not closed ... sothern end of Cooks Bridge. And has other problems according to the JOSM validator.
22017-03-08 04:04:41 UTCTheSwavu Need to also:

1. Remove old councils:

2. Fix the tagging on your new relation.
12017-03-03 23:55:46 UTCWarin61 Relation: 6585065 is a simple way .. does not need to be a relation. And it carries no information as to what it is .. And it crosses over itself.
I have made it a single way 442374458, made the boundaries from the LPI Base Map and tagged it a park. Please review my work here and make any changes...
12017-02-27 03:08:53 UTCWarin61 You have a number of nodes at the ends of tracks with tower=power source=bing ...
I cannot see anything there .. not even with the better LPI Imagery. deleted these as I came across them. e.g. Node: 2555269081
22017-02-27 03:18:10 UTCstevage Weird - thanks for letting me know. If they're not connected to a power=line it was almost certainly a mistake - can't really imagine how that happened.
32017-02-27 03:46:09 UTCWarin61 I had a look for power lines ... they are very hard to see on imagery .. none in OSM itself. The LPI Imagery shows some of that area clear of trees .. and even then I cannot see them... Don't know how .. they don't stand out with the standard rendering so would be easy to miss that way. I only notic...
12017-02-25 01:23:12 UTCWarin61 You have a node named 'Gate 13' ... but there is no physical object tagged ... like barrier=gate .. and it would be best as part of a barrier=wall ...
12017-02-25 01:16:01 UTCWarin61 The storm water drains into Terrys Creek .. but is in NOT part of the creek itself.

Note Terrys Creek is also used as the Ryde City administrative boundary. Changing the creek changes the boundary.

Suggest you add a drain or creek from your storm water to Terrys Creek .. but don't extend the...
12017-02-17 21:15:07 UTCWarin61 What sport/s is/are played here?
The rendered area looks to be several pitches.
Bing imagery shows construction and buildings in this area.
22017-02-20 02:41:39 UTCSwagadactyl Basically a large grass area, used for different sports, Bing imagery is years outdated
12017-02-15 23:24:03 UTCWarin61 Way 435727141 is part of a relation .. this way should not carry tags, it is the relation that should carry the tags.

Deciduous ??? really! .. Evergreen is what is there.
22017-02-15 23:54:15 UTCWarin61 Kenley Park contains areas of grass .. removed tagging for wood.
Florence Cottan Park changed to LPI boundaries
Delected way 435725409 as this contains houses too.
Way 144343003 reduced to exclude houses.

highway=footway excludes motor vehicles by default no need to tag motorvehicle=no.
12017-02-15 02:26:51 UTCWarin61 Another .. not a culvert but a bridge.
12017-02-12 01:57:36 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The Epping platform (5+ 6) is not wide enough - does not line up with my recollections of the lifts at their above ground locations.. I'll do a survey when I can. But i think this may be better as 2 separate platforms as they are separated by walls at this station.
22017-05-17 07:37:41 UTCbentrails Hi... Thanks. I completely understand what you're saying and I agree. Sorry for taking so long to get back to you.
12017-02-08 00:00:40 UTCWarin61 The following nodes do not appear on the LPI Base amp;

These have all been put on way Way: 387068735 that I originally added. I am concerned as to how many other ways you may have similarly added/modified data tha...
22017-02-08 01:23:18 UTCTheSwavu That's because when I updated the boundaries using the data from NSW LPI I used the replace geometry tool in JOSM. That way the history of what happened gets preserved. If you check the boundaries of Nundle SF are still correctly aligned.

32017-02-08 02:09:52 UTCWarin61 Humm yes correctly aligned to the "LPI admin boundaries - state forests" but not shown on the LPI Base Map .. so the source is wrong and means it cannot be verified using the sated source.
42017-02-08 03:22:50 UTCTheSwavu State forests are the dark green areas with the faint grey lines around them labelled with the name such-and-such S.F. Alternatively they are available by downloading from the REST service.
52017-02-08 03:37:29 UTCWarin61 1) This boundary is between 2 state forests - so the colour is the same for both sides on the LPI Base Map
2) there is no faint grey or any other coloured line here on the LPI Base Map.

Therefore the source in not the LPI Base Map.
62017-02-08 03:43:22 UTCTheSwavu Have a closer look they are there:

72017-02-08 04:49:11 UTCWarin61 Visible there .. but not the same location.
At the given locations ... not visible!

Not visible!
82017-02-08 05:01:16 UTCTheSwavu Yeap, that's because they are rendered before the stream. As I said earlier if you can't see the boundaries clearly on the map you should use the REST interface to extract them or use the WMS service. The NSW LPI has helpfully exposed some of the layers so they can be downloaded but most of the base...
92017-02-08 05:07:12 UTCWarin61 You clearly have not looked.
The stream there is not the boundary.

Go on ... look at these nodes ... !
102017-02-08 05:41:41 UTCTheSwavu Hmm.. that's an interesting rendering anomaly you've found there. I've popped off an email to NSW LPI asking what the problem is.

Luckily if you want to validate state forest boundaries then this is one of the base map layers that has been exposed as a REST service so you can download the data di...
12017-02-07 03:12:19 UTCWarin61 Node 4438854071 is not a ford .. there is a bridge here as per LPI Base Map.
Node 4438854852 looks to be a culvert.

Perhaps all theses should be left for a survey!!
12017-02-07 02:44:40 UTCWarin61 I am adding a few tracks in the Bargo State Forest. Way 285828624 - part of the Hume & Hovel ... looks to be a little off the LPI Base map location? So my question is .. what is your source for the entry .. and should I replace it with the LIP data?
12017-02-06 10:12:40 UTCWarin61 The relation you added has no information. Deleted.
12017-02-06 10:12:34 UTCWarin61 The relation you added is not required. Simple relations for boundaries are used where more than one way is required to define the object, that is not the case here.
12017-02-06 04:20:18 UTCWarin61 The changeset comment "These places are important" is subjective. Far better to state something like "added park in my local area."

I have added the playgrounds to these parks. I have also refined the boundary of Greenlow Park. I hope that is an improvement.

The paths you...
12017-02-03 22:08:21 UTCWarin61 Hi,
When you added the library .. there was a node already tagged as the library ... this causes 2 to be present on the map when only one should be present. The polite way is to use the old node as one corner of the new building .. and then copy the tags across to the way (the building) and edit t...
22017-02-04 01:18:30 UTCBella7930 Hi, thank you for the feedback, I will be more careful in the future.
12017-02-03 21:58:11 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Some comments;

1) No name ... so the change set description is wrong.. Possibly 'Add building" ?
2) Building is not 'square' as in the corners are not square... in ID select the object (the building) and press the 'S' key .. see
22017-02-06 23:36:05 UTCaharvey PS. If you're adding multiple buildings at the same time you can add them all then hit Save at the end so you only have one changeset adding a whole block of buildings.
12017-02-03 21:46:47 UTCWarin61 Hi,
You will find the LPI Base Map to have better boundaries for things like parks. Also easier to track creeks.
22017-02-03 21:48:40 UTCWarin61 The Community center does no appear in the stated source - LPI Imagery .. where did it come from?

I have separated up the tennis courts, added hockey fields and bowls ... add basketball courts to the school ..
12017-02-03 21:31:37 UTCWarin61 Park way 471661432 has a name, Immarana Place Reserve - can be found on the LPI Base Map .. and the LPI Base Map has better boundaries ... corrected.

Please refer to the LPI Base Map for more detail as you add/change stuff.
12017-02-03 21:08:51 UTCWarin61 Objects do not exist in the stated source - LIP Imagery. .

OSM data is used by, OSMAnd, Locus maps, Mapbox etc etc... lots of people and organizations use this data. They trust it to be real, not fantasy.

12017-02-03 20:55:22 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Welcome to OSM!
If you look at the imagery then you can see that the oval is also used for soccer.. best entered as a rectangular pitch with sport=soccer .. this renders well on the map.

Regarding the park .. if you look on the LPI Base Map you can see the legal boundaries better ... the po...
12017-02-02 07:26:32 UTCWarin61 What discussion has taken place for this change? None? Then I suggest you start one on the talk au group before you do more.
12017-01-31 03:17:07 UTCWarin61 I did intend to take this out.. mutter mutter.. arr ... I did! :) Way 459153649 removed culvert and layer at 5:28 29/1/17 ... I did not recombine it with each side.

My primary reason for contacting you was the use of the LPI base map to check for bridges... most usefull when it is covered by tre...
22017-01-31 03:49:12 UTCTheSwavu Aahh... mystery solved, different culverts. You fixed at least two bridges, but one less culvert.
12017-01-29 06:06:59 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Where Hill End Road crosses Grattai Creek there is a bridge, you had a culvert. If you look on the LPI base map, zoomed in there, road has black lines on ether side to indicate the bridge ...hard to make out with the shadows in the imagery. I have cahnged it .. I am correction Hill End Road to ...
22017-01-30 21:25:08 UTCTheSwavu Thanks for that. I would have also removed the culvert from the creek.

An Overpass query tells me that I've edited 8500+ waterway crossing in the last 6 months. Even if I'm 95% accurate that's still 425+ mistakes I've made so feel free to just fix them without letting me know. Most of the errors ...
32017-01-31 02:45:13 UTCWarin61 I did remove the culvert ... did not mention it.

As regards water/road crossings .. where I cannot determine it ..I leave it off .. yes it throws errors ... but it does not introduce false data. If it were compulsory .. then I'd chose ford as being the most disruptive to traffic and therefore lea...
42017-01-31 03:10:54 UTCTheSwavu Err.. I think you'll find you didn't:
12017-01-29 23:05:07 UTCWarin61 Minor detail .. again ...

The service station .. that is a duplicate of a node you have there .. best practice is when you make a way (this building) that duplicates a node .. it to remove the node.

The node does carry the name United 24 ... I think that is a brand .. use the brand= tag for t...
12017-01-28 14:01:46 UTCemacsen Hi,

Are you aware that you made a forest in the middle of an apartment complex? That doesn't seem correct. You also marked the area as construction.

Can you please explain or revert this edit?
22017-01-28 23:12:13 UTCWarin61 landuse=forest means the trees are intended to be harvested. If you mean a collection of trees then natural=wood can be used.
32017-01-29 00:34:15 UTCemacsen In either case, it seems inappropriate here.
42017-01-29 16:30:50 UTCitzcorbinn Originally this was marked as construction.. But construction has been completed and has been changed to Apartment.. I have deleted forrest..
52017-01-29 22:55:49 UTCWarin61 The area is rather confused!

I have remove the construction way that way still there .. so that is done.

However a number of other things ..

The Cafe restaurants (note spelling) way 469596001 ... I'd think that is part of the Linq apartments building? A the moment this is tagged as a separ...
12017-01-28 22:54:27 UTCWarin61 Has the WHOLE are changed from Industrial???
22017-01-28 23:29:39 UTCjamesbrah Most of it isn't current anymore, there is a lot of new housing. It would have taken a very long time to adjust and the google maps aren't 100% accurate either, but it's better to not be there and be wrong than be there and be 50% misleading.
32017-01-28 23:50:27 UTCWarin61 Everything is 'out of date' as soon as it is produced :) I look at maps as a guide .. what you see is real, what is on a map can be 'out of date'. If you follow your philosophy you'll end up with a blank map ...
I'd rather map the bits that I know are residential - removing them from industrial.
42017-01-28 23:51:56 UTCjamesbrah On Monday I will try to add in the areas I know are industrial. There is a chunk that hasn't changed for awhile.
52017-01-28 23:52:37 UTCWarin61 Oh ...
side note...
your changeset says the source is LPI Imagery + OSM .. I would add 'personal survey' ... or 'personal knowledge' that would help those looking at it to understand that the imagery is not the only thing you used.
12017-01-27 21:35:26 UTCWarin61 Hi, welcome to OSM.
You have added names to some of the paths you have added .. where did you get the names from? If these are your own 'names' ... then don't add them to the map, OSM should be used for 'official' or at least 'locally used' names. You can add the tag 'source' to say where these thi...
22017-01-28 23:29:08 UTCJodie Cameron Where in a small local town so there are no path names so i just named them after what the location is called. If this is incorrect i am sorry, it wasn't my intention. I am new to using thing and was still trying to understand. What should i name the path if there is no name?
32017-01-28 23:45:37 UTCWarin61 noname=yes is used to indicate there is no name. If you don't know the name ... just leave the tag off, if you know there is no name then use the noname=yes tag.
The basic guide is to map what you can see, don't make stuff up.

The OSMwiki is a fair guide ...
12017-01-28 23:24:38 UTCWarin61 Wrong? Shades of grey more like.

There is the OSMwiki .. as a guide (not a rule .. OSM does not have may real rules)

pedestrian highway

overview of highways

Keep mapping.. particular...
12017-01-28 23:06:59 UTCWarin61 This has been deleted by some one..
possibly because it does not exist?
You will need to justify it better if it is real.
12017-01-28 22:53:08 UTCWarin61 The park does not cross the road.
Further it does not encompass the house next door.
I have corrected this to LPI Base Map data ... take a look.
12017-01-28 22:40:32 UTCWarin61 Deleted.

Area is not a park. Not shown in either LPI Imagery nor LPI base map.

Please do not enter fantasy. OSM is for actual objects.
12017-01-28 22:33:51 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Welcome to OSM.

The 'Scott Park' entry looks more like 'Clareville Park' to me.. use the LPI Base Map to get the legal boundaries.
I have moved some of the boundary points ... away from the roads - they don't actually connect, there are foot paths in the way. There are more detailed points...
12017-01-28 22:16:15 UTCWarin61 Talk to 'em. Otherwise you may get into edit wars.
12017-01-28 22:08:34 UTCWarin61 Use landcover=grass ... landuse=grass may get changed. You can use both tags together just to avoid any migration issues with the landuse=grass tag.
12017-01-28 22:06:15 UTCWarin61 Hi, welcome to OSM.
Try using the LPI Base Map - that has cliffs on it - much easier to follow.
12017-01-28 21:53:43 UTCWarin61 Not very polite to delete stuff without contacting the original mapper?
12017-01-28 01:06:57 UTCWarin61 Hi, welcome to OSM. Some comments...

The footpath does not cross a waterway .. so should not carry the ford=yes tag.

The parks boundary can be better determined using LPI Base Map rather than the imagery.

There are some other green areas on the Base Map that may be of interest to you ... a...
22017-01-28 01:09:22 UTCWarin61 P.S.
On the Base Map there looks to be a footpath connected to your park that goes through to Kumali Close ... add it if it is there?
12017-01-27 22:25:17 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Welcome to OSM.

You have added node 4637970582 with the tags lesiure=park and name=Granby Park Sign ... This is not ideal in three ways;

The park is already entered as an area ... so there is no need to enter it again as leisure=park.

The name 'Granby Park Sign' I think says what the p...
12017-01-27 22:14:10 UTCWarin61 Hi, welcome to OSM.

You have added the way 469421084 as highway=pedestrian .. this is used for wide areas of pedestrian spaces .. use highway=footway for normal width paths. Up to you to judge it.

It should be connected to the road - roads can be assumed to have pedestrian capabilities so the...
12017-01-27 21:45:53 UTCWarin61 Hi, welcome to OSM.

The park (way 469412763) looks to be a house - 58 Oswald Street. Is it really a park now?

The footways you added should be integrated with the data that is already in OSM .. where they cross a road then should be connected using a node that is 'on' both the road and the foo...
12017-01-27 21:27:09 UTCWarin61 Welcome to OSM.

As well as the LPI Imagery there is the LPI Base Map .. that gives you the boundaries for the park - you can use that base map data to make the park into an area .. it looks much better on the map.
22017-01-27 22:53:18 UTCaharvey Sorry, I only just saw this note after changing it to an area.
12017-01-27 21:15:55 UTCWarin61 You have removed the road 'Evans Street' totally from the map!

This is wrong.

If you want to add footpaths .. then add, don't change a valid object that is there and used to something else.
12017-01-15 00:10:40 UTCaharvey A lot of the nodes you've added here are duplicates of things already mapped. Eg The Star casino is already mapped as a tourism=attraction at

Wet N Wild Sydney at

Potentially others too. Why did you create the...
22017-01-15 00:25:10 UTCWarin61 Would have checked these for duplicates at the time of entry ... will recheck on the two you are concerned with for speed.
32017-01-15 00:43:26 UTCWarin61 Ok - Way: The Star (16597926) Had no tourist=attraction when I added node 43749057538 ... so not a 'duplicate' at the time? When you added tourist=attraction to this way ... that was the duplication .. delete the node?
I am not certain that the whole building is a tourist attraction.
Way 31494...
42017-01-15 06:54:57 UTCWarin61 Quite usefull. I have reviewed the western and northern ones. Some are resorts - better tagged tourism=resort. A few are similar - used web search to resolve names and function. Some are duplicates. I have added some details to some - websites, opening hours, a few made into ways with boundaries. So...
52017-01-15 23:58:24 UTCaharvey >Ok - Way: The Star (16597926) Had no tourist=attraction when I added node 43749057538 ... so not a 'duplicate' at the time? When you added tourist=attraction to this way ... that was the duplication .. delete the node?
I am not certain that the whole building is a tourist attraction.

62017-01-16 00:05:48 UTCWarin61 One hand washes the other.
I need some clear time to do the rest of these. Possibly this afternoon.
As I said, I think I only checked them for duplication of tourism=attraction and not other things and that has lead to this problem. Still learning.
72017-01-19 02:49:46 UTCWarin61 That took longer than I thought! Some deletions, many changes. I have taken some to be tourism=resort for example. Others I have expanded to be ways. Many have added website links. Anyway .. all reviewed now,
12017-01-16 04:42:47 UTCWarin61 You have added a Way: 431386832 tagged landuse=forest .. I think you mean natural=wood. Generally landuse means the area is used for some human purpose, forest usually means it is logged. This area is not logged. I have altered it. The area is already covered by a larger natural=wood anyway so it wo...
12017-01-09 23:25:09 UTCWarin61 hi
Way: 235298166 has crop=beet this is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
22017-01-10 00:35:48 UTCSomeoneElse @Warin61 it depends on the type of beet, actually. Certainly in the UK a lot aren't grown as table vegetables but to be processed into sugar at e.g. . The latter tend to be referred to (at least agriculturally) as "sugarbeet" - they're larger a...
32017-01-10 01:00:39 UTCWarin61 There looks to be rather a large number of 'beets'! Spinach beet, silver beet, Spinach beet, yellow, red, white, Italian beetroot, field beet...

Humm ... perhaps best left alone?
12017-01-09 23:26:24 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 502A/1 56 (420832495) has crop=beet this is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
12017-01-09 23:23:46 UTCWarin61 hi
Way: 353475627 has crop=beet this is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
12017-01-09 23:22:29 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 437773357 crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
12017-01-09 23:21:23 UTCWarin61 hi,
Way: Schlag: Kröll, Wolfgang (442460302) crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
12017-01-09 23:20:04 UTCWarin61 hi
Way: 428129376 crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
12017-01-09 23:19:10 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: Burak (310845843) crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
12017-01-09 23:16:34 UTCWarin61 hi
Way: 443049326 crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
12017-01-09 23:15:32 UTCWarin61 Hi
Way: свекольное поле (433554192) crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English
12017-01-07 10:01:21 UTCaharvey Regarding the signage on the ground indicates the southern extent of the NP extends further. Do you think it's okay to update it to match the on the ground data? Also I suspect the boundary for the rest is simply mean high water mark, so can it be joined t...
22017-01-07 21:10:01 UTCWarin61 Hi,
No problem extending to the south for ground truth. Possibly the LPI data is out of date here?
On the waterline... looks like the LPI boundary is the low water mark ... I'd leave that alone unless you have some evidence otherwise? It would make some sense for the low water mark boundary as a p...
32017-01-08 02:32:16 UTCTheSwavu I put the suburb boundary in before we had access to the LPI data and I was using best guess as to what the ABS boundaries were on the ground, hence using the coastline.

Interestingly the NPWS boundary isn't consistent with the cadastre around the coastline, which is a bit odd because the propert...
42017-01-08 04:19:33 UTCWarin61 Looking at the 'water boundary' you can compare the LPI Base Map to the LPI or bing Imagery and see that the water level is above where this boundary lies... so I would assume that this boundary is low water mark. I think 'coastline' is taken at high water mark?

Looking at the NSW NP website for...
52017-01-08 04:49:38 UTCaharvey >As to the southern boundary it is currently correctly aligned with the cadastre so unless you happen to have found the survey pegs I'd say that's the best available information.

There is a NPWS sign 70m from the currently mapped boundary. I suspect they just put the sign up outside the NP. I ...
62017-01-08 06:18:37 UTCWarin61 The LPI is where surveyors go to get the legal boundaries! LPI base map has those boundaries... look at your own property to see it. I know it is good for me and at least some of my relatives (where I have checked).

Snapping things together is ok .. if they deserve to go together! I have had to ...
72017-01-09 00:34:06 UTCaharvey >The LPI is where surveyors go to get the legal boundaries! LPI base map has those boundaries

I believe that except for newer LandXML submissions a surveyor will use the distance/bearing measurements on the plan, not the digital cadastre, as the digital cadastre you see in the LPI Base Map has...
82017-01-09 00:59:22 UTCWarin61 Fruther reading on [1} "The database is constantly maintained or updated on a daily basis from registered plans (including E-Plan), registration of land transactions in NSW and changes in administrative boundaries as gazetted. The data is up-to-date to within 10 working days from when a plan is...
92017-01-09 00:59:40 UTCTheSwavu 1. After typing in my comment the other day I was pondering why the boundaries are that way at Barrenjoey and I've realised that the boundary follows the low tide mark. (Also means that the lighthouse reserve must of had a combination of high/low tide boundaries).

2. I'd also previously looked u...
102017-01-09 01:22:45 UTCTheSwavu Depends on what you mean by the basemap. The meta data is for the underlying data so if you extract the data rather than tracing then it's up-to-date to within 10 days. I don't know how often the tiles that get served for the visual map are re-rendered so it may take some time for it to show up on ...
12017-01-07 22:20:51 UTCWarin61 Cliff's Trail appears on the LIP Base Map as Cliffs Trail .. and as a track rather than a footway. How is your memory? Is it wide enough for a car to fit down (4WD accepted)? If it is that wide then it is a track. The LPI Base Map also shows it extending further south, I have added that bit.
22017-01-08 00:38:44 UTCmacAlba Yes, you're quite correct. It was a vehicle 4WD track at the time we walked it - I've no idea what it's current condition is though. If I had to guess I'd say it's maintained as a fire trail.
12017-01-01 22:58:53 UTCWarin61 Node: 2628523302 - Forbes Rv Road looks to be out by some 50 meters .. there are other deviations along this road too. Possible side tracks? My references are the LPI base map and the LPI imagery.
22017-01-02 11:20:16 UTCPapa Fletch I would have taken this from my Garmin GPS tracking. I have found the tracking can sometimes be out by 20m or so.
12016-12-02 00:56:50 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I have changed some of this! Mainly road classifications to comply with the LPI Base Map. Removed some 4wd from road names .. better as a tag 4wd_only=yes... but I think in this area it would depend on logging activity in the area.
I have add a few tracks from the LPI base map. And some other...
12016-11-28 21:59:11 UTCWarin61 Hi,
What is the source of these names?
22016-11-28 23:02:37 UTCWarin61 I have added a few details - tower + buildings at the top of the hill, parking area western end, expanded the parking node to an area eastern end, and a building just out of it.. I think this should be building=roof, layer=1 ... and a node inside it with tourism=information, information=board or map...
12016-11-27 05:46:05 UTCWarin61 Way 354530546 appears to be a private plantation, Removed relation referring to this single relation and added tags landuse=forest, note=possibly a private plantation possibly Nanagrve Station.
12016-11-25 00:31:22 UTCWarin61 Sections of the BNT are private, the tags horse=yes,foot=yes, bicycle=yes on the relation are not correct for all of the BNT. Access would be best placed on the ways as they vary, not on this relation.
12015-01-20 14:06:36 UTCSK53 Hi, have just been looking at all retail establishments in Australia from OSM and noticed "iloveistanbul". This looks like the sort of place I'd map as amenity=fast_food, cuisine=kebab, even if it has some seating. If its a proper restaurant doing kebabs, then amenity=restaurant, takeaway=...
22016-11-22 10:34:17 UTCWarin61 Hartley Public School (node 3287366361) is not on the LPI Base Map nor is it listed on the NSW Dept of Education website. On the LPI Base Map in that location is a park, Bush Fire brigade and a residence. Made into a note, while adding the other features.
32016-11-22 10:46:55 UTCmycae-gmx OK, my error. It looks like this is actually a historic building, which has been turned into a private rental property.
42016-11-22 20:18:31 UTCWarin61 OK, I'll go ahead and delete it then.
12016-11-21 23:41:30 UTCWarin61 You have set the width of Wheelbarrow ridge road to 1 ... that is 1 meter width .. you cannot get a car down a 1 meter wide road... reset back to 4 as it was before you changed it.
22016-11-22 00:47:48 UTCrustl Just out of curiosity, what editor do you use, the one I use (Potlatch2) doesn't have any mention of width, only type and surface
32016-11-22 00:48:58 UTCrustl Sorry update it does have width but I don't set that.
42016-11-22 01:15:51 UTCWarin61 I use JOSM.
According to the history of way 174606310 displayed using JOSM the width was set to 4 on 5/8/12 at 9.01 pm. It was then changed by this changeset 30/7/13 10.29 pm
I have confirmed this using
52016-11-22 05:10:08 UTCrustl No problem, the track is definitely wide enough for a vehicle.
12016-11-20 21:33:01 UTCWarin61 Hi,
You have marked way 196266984 as noname=yes ... if you zoom in it has a name. I have corrected it.
12016-11-10 01:07:22 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 57690476 tagged sport=tennis .. has no physical tag/s. Appears to be redundant as the individual tennis courts are mapped.
I have added surface=paved to these individual courts and added 2 netball courts.
12016-10-28 05:36:50 UTCWarin61 Hi
What does 'trail_visibility_1=path' mean?
you already have 'trail_visibility=good' on Way: Ridgemont Avenue Fire Trail (384931687)
12016-10-28 05:32:36 UTCWarin61 Hi
navigationaid= rather than naviagationaid
22016-10-28 05:36:18 UTCinas ta
12016-10-27 08:19:42 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I am entering some tracks for the Strava Cycling heat map. Your entered way 420021676 is part of this .. but it has no tags. I have tagged it as highway=unclassified. It could do with some more - surface=unpaved? source=?
12016-10-17 20:59:18 UTCWarin61 Relation (361693) is not closed..

22016-10-18 01:23:43 UTCnevw Thanks Warin61.
I will fix it in next day or so.
32016-10-18 11:05:17 UTCnevw Relation now closed.
42016-10-23 04:25:12 UTCWarin61 Goodo.
While adding new stuff is what motivates me, 'housekeeping' makes the map work better. I have a few of my own things to 'fix up' too.
12016-10-21 09:36:10 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: Old Wentworth Road (432825812) you have as access private .. yet the council map lists it .. see
It also appears on the LPI Base map.
So access is private?
12016-10-17 08:47:35 UTCcleary I agree that neighbourhood is not appropriate in non-urban settings. In regard to Tucklan, I surveyed there one to two years ago and I think I was able to record only two addresses in the very small Tucklan area and satellite imagery shows only two dwellings with adjacent sheds. So perhaps "iso...
22016-10-17 21:13:02 UTCWarin61 GNB has some statement of open source? Not fussed.
However the GNB 'rural place' is used for both inhabitabited places and uninhabited places! It is not a 'good' description. What attracted my attention to this was the use of neighborhood for places inside the Blue Mountains NP that have never bee...
12016-10-17 20:57:04 UTCWarin61 Bing used to determine a boundary ?

You have a lot of these ... and I don't think you are using bing as the source for these changes.
22016-10-18 00:36:44 UTCFizzie41 Hi Warin. Sorry, at the time I thought there were 2 boundaries shown for Lamington / Springbrook National Park, almost but not exactly the same, so I deleted 1 of them. Turned out that 1 was for NP & the other was Gondwana World Heritage area, which is very close, but not identical, to the Park ...
12016-10-17 04:20:46 UTCWarin61 Tucklan ... while the council and post office may not regard it as a hamlet, I'd not think of it as a neighborhood either. I think in OSM terms .. hamlet.
12016-10-17 00:09:51 UTCWarin61 Reentered removal of touching rings.
Confirmed relationships are closed using JOSM validator and JOE+SM relationship editor.

If you find this relationship broken .. contact me .. I want to see what your talking about...
22016-10-17 20:55:56 UTCFvGordon See version 4 of way : the last node of version 4 of this way is connected to one or more other ways, but the other end has been open (no connection to other ways). I connected this end to node 4029285618, which is member of other ways, to close th...
12016-10-16 04:38:20 UTCWarin61 'The Oaks' .. no one lives there .. so it is not a 'neighborhood' nor a 'hamlet' .. it is a 'locality'? node 117041402.

I have also altered the classifications of tracks/paths around here to suit the LPI Base Map.

12016-10-10 02:39:18 UTCWarin61 Node Portland Common (4400710719, v1) looks to be a duplication of Way: Portland Common (52054047)

12016-10-05 23:53:19 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: Private property (40260304) is named, at least in part 'Bark Hut trail'. It is also in part inside a National Park .. so not 'Private property'. In addition hte name should not be used to signify access ...
12016-10-05 00:34:06 UTCWarin61 Cannot see it in imagery.
Lacks name, source. Not visible in imagery nor on LPI base map.

Will be removing and entering LPI data.

12016-10-03 06:55:19 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 439819578 you set sport=hockey, I have changed this to sport=field_hockey .. hockey could be either field or ice hockey. OSM now uses field_hockey or ice_hockey to avoid confusion.
See the wiki
12016-09-29 01:29:50 UTCTheSwavu You do realise that these all need to be connected to the appropriate waterways?
22016-09-29 06:55:16 UTCWarin61 Yep.
I will target those with no local waterway first. Ones with adjacent waterway will be next.

I have done one .. and that creek looks to have no 'outlet' .. other than some 'lakes'. Only another 194 to go.
32016-09-29 07:16:31 UTCWarin61 Humm ..
Maybe I should put a 'fixme' on them .. that way the 'fixme' can be removed by anyone who fixes it? 'fixme=attach to waterway' would do.
42016-10-02 23:34:38 UTCWarin61 Fixmes in place.
I have done the 'easy ones' - those with existing simple waterways. These are quick so possibly were the best to 'fix' first.
Around 105 left without waterways. And 5? that are on waterway areas ...
12016-09-25 03:47:02 UTCWarin61 Hi, welcome!

Firstly ... there is better imagery available for NSW .. instead of selecting bing select LPI Imagery and/or LPI base Map ... the Base Map is usefull for boundaries - such as the park you have here.

Secondly .. the park is sufficiently mapped using the way only, you don't need a ...
12016-07-14 12:30:22 UTCLeon K Hi, Just a note that i'm updating some of these.
The building tag is used to indicate that the object is a building outline, not that it has a building on it.
In these cases you are tagging the entire block as a building.
22016-07-14 22:31:06 UTCmrpulley For the outline of the land around the Kingdom Hall, you can use landuse=religious - see for info.
32016-07-14 22:37:22 UTCmrpulley Also, the tags religion/denomination tags should be religion=christian denomination=jehovahs_witness - see for info
42016-09-24 08:02:05 UTCWarin61 I am slowly removing the node that duplicates the way - same/similar tags. These are data bloat.
It is normal to respond to these comments inputMan.
12016-09-14 09:55:57 UTCWarin61 Norah Creek?
I have Jews Creek from LPI, cannot find Norah Creek on GeoScience Australia place name search. Possibly local community being 'politically correct'? Way 367426782. I have left the culvert with that name, but changed the creek - along with its course.
22016-09-14 14:09:29 UTCmrpulley I don't have my voice recordings from last year, so I don't recall the sign. There must be a Norah Creek somewhere, as there is a Norah Creek Road nearby! I'm not planning on going that way for a while, but I'll try to remember to check sometime with a survey.
32016-09-14 21:32:55 UTCTheSwavu GNB says Jews Creek:
42016-09-14 21:54:21 UTCWarin61 Now that is interesting .. says Nora Creek.. as an old name. So maybe the LPI data base is more upto date here.. I have come across places where it is old.
52016-09-14 22:34:46 UTCWarin61 Strangely I just came across Norah Creek Road - way 180236917. I was extending Mandagery Creek and there it is ... Norah Creek Road.
62017-08-28 10:02:01 UTCmrpulley I've just checked the signs for the creek crossings. Larras Lee Road has 'Jews Creek'. Banjo Paterson Way has 'Norah Creek' (with the 'h'). Burgoon Lane doesn't have any signs. I'll add an 'old_name=Norah Creek' tag to the creek.
12016-09-13 10:30:57 UTCTheSwavu I'm guessing that 4.5 km long culvert don't really exist:
22016-09-13 21:19:22 UTCWarin61 Corrected errors. :) thanks.
12016-09-12 23:50:36 UTCWarin61 The Styx River is not the boundary of the Styx River State Forest .. nor do I think it is the boundary of the Cunnawarra NP... I have separated it off the Styx River State Forest. Will 'look at' the NP boundary later.
22016-09-17 09:01:09 UTCnevw Yes, looks ok.
12016-09-11 21:28:14 UTCWarin61 Hummm ... the relation should have tags on it. The ways should be 'free' of the relationship tags.

I think there are at least 2 tracks here ... the relation is for the outer one. I have added that relationship.

There is more detail taht can be added - a barrier with gaps.. I have added those...
22016-09-12 04:01:57 UTCLeon K My understanding is that both methods are permissible.
Admittedly when you start adding more detail as you have then tagging the relation does makes more sense.
12016-09-09 23:45:37 UTCWarin61 Extended and added detail from LPI Hydrography data for this creek.
12016-08-31 08:47:14 UTCWarin61 Hi
Way 208009289 was tagged
name=Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery

That is 3 features on one OSM element... too many!
I want to add
name=Mount Pleasant Lookout...

So I have removed the tag tourism=viewpoint off to a node an...
12016-08-27 23:46:49 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I have changed way 23641312 (West Witney Sports Ground).
Pitches are best on the actual pitches - I have added some of these as separate ways in this area.
The area I think is a recreation ground .. so I have tagged the way as such.
22016-08-28 11:25:04 UTCmesspert You have missed the cricket pitches which I know to exist from when I am passing the Sports Ground. There are also mini-soccer pitches according to the Town Council Website. I suppose that I might do a gps survey of the pitches one day if it happens to cross my mind when I am free.
32016-08-28 22:33:17 UTCWarin61 The cricket pitch I cannot see in Bing.

The 'mini-soccer' pitches are visible .. but
undocumented in the OSM wiki
too easy to confuse with other things.
So I have left them off as I cannot reliably map them.
12016-08-24 01:09:10 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Building=residential Way: 428418578 should be building=farm (main residential building of farm) .. and ways 428418576 and 428418572 (were building=farm) don't look like residence .. so I have them as building=yes.
12016-08-22 10:14:12 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I have changed the 'basketball' courts to netball ... e.g. way 418200418. That is what they appear to be in LPI Imagery.
12016-08-22 04:42:35 UTCWarin61 Way 422672861 tagged as 'building=yes' should be only on the building footprint - not the property boundaries.
Node 4224101948 has many tags the same as the above way ... so it is an unwanted repetition.
12016-08-21 11:00:57 UTCWarin61 Charles Sturt Uni ... you had tennis courts .. I have changes these to netbal as that is what is shown by ht eLPI Imagery and Base Map.
12016-08-07 22:03:51 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation: Store Beach (2927697) is not closed. I think this may be left as a simple way - not a relation?
12016-08-02 00:12:11 UTCWarin61 In iD select the background layer as LPI Base Map. Now you can see how 'Rotary Drive' (way 48200084) follows the boundary of the Clyde River National Park and not the road itself. The LPI Base Map is not perfect - select the iD base layer as LPI Imagery ... you' ll see differences from time to time...
12016-07-31 23:29:42 UTCWarin61 Too quick for me. Thanks for the correction.
12016-07-30 01:20:05 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I have restored the Western Sydney Parklands boundaries to the LPI Administration Boundaries ... please leave these alone, they are the legal boundaries and include rights of way etc.
I have retained a change made by you as a fence - Way: 434837423, please modify this 'fence' as appropriate? ...
22016-07-31 01:21:21 UTCChopStiR Hi Warren, I had changed the boudaries based on current management. The LPI map does not reflect the current management.
I have re-added Plough and Harrow as a separate park area with the key tag Operator to denote WSP.

The WSP is far more extensive then what is shown on the LPI map.

32016-07-31 02:09:16 UTCWarin61 If you are going to change it to some other source ... remove the source=LPI etc.. tag from the relation. And put in what ever source you are using.

Note that the areas excluded in the LPI data may have legal easements on them .. they may be included in a map by the Western Sydney Parklands .. b...
12016-07-30 07:35:01 UTCWarin61 Hi,
You look to have added some roads to the boundary relation of the Clyde River National Park? And Possibly deleted an outer way for this relation?
Relation: 5857616
Ways that don't look to be part of it ? :
Way: Driveway (434309908)
Way: Snapper Point Road (434309903)

And .. Way: Rotary...
12016-07-29 01:51:48 UTCWarin61 Hi,
looks like you have made some changes to the boundaries of the Western Sydney Parklands. There is a conflict in the outer ways sharing the same space. I have moved the southern part of Way: 402801662 and the northern western Way: 402801663. You have added gates to Way: 402801663 ... umm gates ...
12016-07-26 11:46:16 UTCWarin61 Relation 5929494 removed landuse=forest added natural=wood, combined with the 'old' relationship 5929493.
12016-07-24 23:34:56 UTCWarin61 I don't think 'aerial imagery' is adequate ... is this from Bing or Mapbox or some other source?
12016-07-10 13:48:04 UTCSomeoneElse This has already been reverted by a local mapper, but in future please don't make mechanical edits like this without prior discussion.
22016-07-10 22:22:57 UTCWarin61 "mechanical edits"? ... you mean that using JOSMs 'Download for API...' cannot be done to identify incorrectly tagged objects (see the wiki for "use sport=" NOT sports=!!!!) ????????
32016-07-10 23:21:57 UTCSomeoneElse JOSM's, and the wiki's, recommendations aren't foolproof. In this case you changed data that potentially affects display in a downstream website (osm-nottingham).
By all means try and persuade the person the who added these shops that they're wrong, but basic common courtesy would suggest that you...
42016-07-11 00:33:51 UTCWarin61 Tagging for ONE render? Where other renders use the sport= tag ... such as OSMAnd? I think the correct tag should be applied so that all the renders can 'see' it.
It would be indulgent to apply different tagging that others do not use.
52016-07-11 00:57:26 UTCSomeoneElse It's not about tagging for one renderer - it's about having the common courtesy to explain why you think something is wrong rather than just changing it.
Just like the difference between "football" and "soccer" I can't get excited about the actual tagging difference in this case...
12016-07-10 05:51:13 UTCWarin61 Hi,
please see the wiki ... it says "Use sport=* to specify more details of sold products, useful values can be taken from sport key. "

22016-07-10 05:52:56 UTCWarin61 P.S. Don't blame me for the inconsistency with OSM tags.. I'd much rather use something like sells=* to specify what a shop/vending_machine sells.
32016-07-10 18:04:44 UTCwill_p I appreciate that there are arguments in favour of using the sport key in these cases. However, there are counter arguments of which two immediately come to mind:

1. As mentioned in my changeset comment, with shops it's common to use the format shop=x x=y to expand on the products sold.

2. Th...
42016-07-10 22:59:10 UTCWarin61 Some sports shops sell food, drinks, clothing ...
But the OSM convention is to use sport=* to specify what sport (or multiple sport using the ; as a separator). I have started a topic on the talk uk list.
12016-07-10 00:29:45 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The Broadway Post Office Node: 3977545159 ... from the LPI base map is across the road - same building .. I have added it. One of the two needs to be deleted ... leave it to you?
12016-07-06 09:21:45 UTCWarin61 Way: 402805211 Appears to be property boundary for Dangar Island.

Way: Dangar Island (172544584) -part of multipolygon Hawesbury river.

Relation: Dangar Island (6039000) uses way 402805211 ... this duplicates the above way feature.

To remove the duplicate (chose which...
12016-07-05 00:02:42 UTCWarin61 Hi
Way: 219841753 looks like a building? Presently only has an attribute of sport=hockey .. so it won't render. Hockey is also not detailed enough .. field_hockey or ice_hockey?
12016-07-04 23:31:06 UTCWarin61 Hi
Way: 47651696 looks like sport=rugby to me rather than sport=hockey?
12016-07-04 23:28:43 UTCWarin61 Hi
Way: 324958533 looks like sport=soccer to me rather than sport=soccer?
12016-07-04 23:28:12 UTCWarin61 Hi
Way: 319666766 looks like sport=soccer to me rather than sport=soccer?
12016-07-04 23:24:16 UTCWarin61 Hi
Way: 26115162 sport changed from soccer to filed hockey. Part of the Mount Eden Hockey Club.
12016-07-03 22:59:03 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Winton (node 247811870) reset to town rather than a city. Longreach is larger and has more services than Winton yet it is rated as a town.
12016-07-03 01:49:14 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Corrected sports=athletics to sport=athletics. Added to sport=tennis .. leisure=pitch, surface and source and separated up into different courts. Also added netball court.
12016-07-03 01:39:04 UTCWarin61 HI
The Cranfield Golf Academy, node 2975561271 has no physical characteristic - so it may not render. I have corrected the tag sports=golf to sport=golf.
12016-07-03 01:03:12 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Corrected sports= to sport=.
22016-07-03 01:11:45 UTCWarin61 added building=yes ... as these features marked sport= have no physical feature for rendering.
12016-07-02 05:05:53 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Found you ... :) .. could not find you before I made the change on the wiki.
I think the original access tag is for motor vehicles... and those may well be restricted here. Most mappers only consider motor vehicles...
22016-07-02 07:52:18 UTCswanilli Yes. There is a sign on a gate that says "Rail Corridor" and "Authorised vehicles only" but the tracks are in Garrawarra State Conservation area not on the Rail Corridor which is only 30 m wide.
32016-07-02 08:41:53 UTCswanilli On checking 30 m is not accurate. I have read rail corridor is "15m from the outermost rail on either side" but it is clearly more than this in most places, 60 m or more. It does not alter conclusion for these tracks which are well outside rail corridor.
42016-07-02 21:42:49 UTCWarin61 The sign says
"Authorized Vehicles Only" ... not just "Rail Corridor".
See for who can use it... looks to me to EXCLUDE MOTOR VEHICLES!
If necessary I will ring them and confirm that this tra...
12016-07-02 05:21:35 UTCWarin61 Hi, example Way: Saltpan Creek Track (174143548) tagged access=yes means all things can access it .. vehicles bicycles and horses etc. But access=no and foot=yes means only people who are walking can access it ... and that is the way it was tagged before you changed it?
12016-06-30 03:06:03 UTCWarin61 Relation 6197563 (dog park) is not closed. And I cannot make it out from the LPI data and the ways in the relationship.
12016-06-24 06:56:26 UTCpnorman Hello,

you seem to be doing a mechanical edit of some kind. In OSM mechanical edits need to be documented and you need to consult with the community first. Was this done here?
22016-06-24 07:49:46 UTCWarin61 In this changeset, looks to be removing the source=nearmap tag ... in bulk. WHY?
32016-06-24 16:47:02 UTCaharvey This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40258772 where the changeset comment is:
12016-06-22 06:24:06 UTCWarin61 Relation:\t6321641... removed duplicate tag natural=wetland from ways that this relation references. Please only tag the relationship, not the ways that it uses.
12016-06-20 23:52:06 UTCWarin61 Way: Knodingbul Forest Road (244396702)

Changed name in the north to Knodingbul Road as per LPI Base Map info. Altered location as per LPI base map - much easier to pick out the course of the road without the tree cover.
12016-06-19 23:18:27 UTCWarin61 Hannahs Road? way 205437634 looks to be Beech Rd .. according to LPI Base Map..

I have made a few changes in this area, mostly additions, some road name changes.
12016-06-19 23:18:11 UTCWarin61 Way 205437227 looks to be taken off imagery. LPI Base map is 'better' .. particularly in the north where the mapped road looks to be a drive way. I think this can be changed to agree with the LPI Base Map to gain accuracy.
12016-06-18 09:39:11 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Your tagging some ways as boundaries.. but these ways are not closed so cannot be the entire boundary ... for example Way: 405794390. These boundaries you are trying to map should be entered as relationships ...
12016-06-16 09:32:25 UTCWarin61 Way: 318676779 looks like animal quarters ... certainly not a hanger? Unless it is a guilder or two. But I'd think there would be vehicle tracks then.
12016-06-12 22:33:00 UTCWarin61 Hi,
node 2817433908 appears to be 4 pitches here (using bing imagery) .. but what kind of football? soccer?
22016-06-12 23:36:04 UTCMichael Wheeler Rugby, soccer and afl are played here
32016-06-14 09:37:34 UTCWarin61 Ok, I have place this node into a way that I made from bing, and placed appropriate tags on the way. I then copied this way 3 times to show what is evident in bing imagery. AFL is usually played on a pitch with an oval shape .. all these pitches are rectangular? Anyway .. makes the map look better.
12016-06-14 00:05:02 UTCWarin61 Way: 238732436 .. this too is rugby?
22016-06-14 00:05:50 UTCWarin61 Again sport=rugby for Way: 413291277?
12016-06-13 23:59:11 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 413293177 has sport=football ... football is not specific enough ... I thing this is rugby?
12016-06-13 23:52:15 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 270248268 sport=football changed to sport=rugby as per the got web site. football is not specific enough.
12016-06-13 23:27:45 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way: 31612926 sport=football ... what kind of football?
12016-06-13 23:19:20 UTCWarin61 Changed sport=football to sport=australian_football;gaelic_games
on way 74481627 - St Marys Park.
12016-06-13 23:07:39 UTCWarin61 Hi,
What kind of football?
From bing imagery it looks like cricket is also played here too.
12016-06-12 23:21:57 UTCWarin61 Hi, changed way 74100994 to
12016-06-12 23:19:02 UTCWarin61
Hi, changed way 74308764 to
12016-06-12 23:18:21 UTCWarin61 Hi, changed way 75219823 to
12016-06-12 23:18:16 UTCWarin61
Hi, changed way 74684843 to
12016-06-12 23:18:04 UTCWarin61 Hi, changed way 73004248 to
12016-06-12 23:17:57 UTCWarin61 Hi, changed way 75510159 to
12016-06-12 23:17:51 UTCWarin61 Hi, changed way 75406474 to
12016-06-12 07:16:02 UTCWarin61 post office appears to be 1 km to the east now. node 1737974502
12016-06-11 22:47:09 UTCWarin61 Node 300463574 has no physical feature - will not render. Suggest its tags are moved to some appropriate physical feature.
12016-06-10 10:24:38 UTCchillly Is this a mech edit?

Association football in the UK is NOT soccer, it is football, and yes I'm sure you're going to quote the wiki at me, but it is NOT soccer in British English.
22016-06-10 21:59:24 UTCWarin61 No, fully manual. I have found some to be tennis/netball/basketball courts. One was both rugby and soccer. Where I could not identify what sport was/is played there I left a fixme. Each and every pitch has been looked at using my eyes using Bing imagery. I have missed some! What do you expect of a ...
32016-06-10 22:06:48 UTCWarin61 A dictionary def of football has 'chiefly';
soccer - British English
Austrailain Rules - Australia WA, SA,Vic and Tasmania
Rugby League - Australia Qld., NSW
Rugby League or Rugby Union - Australia Qld., NSW

I'd put money on Americans using the term 'football' for their own sport, not socce...
42016-06-11 00:39:00 UTCtrigpoint Although in the case of Rugby we should probably differentiate between Rugby Union and and and .........
52016-06-11 10:44:49 UTCSomeoneElse For the record, "soccer" is _not_ the regular British English term for the sport you're trying to tag here, "football" is.

There are however cases where OSM has adopted an americanism (e.g. sidewalk) in order to avoid confusion; that may make sense here (but some prior discu...
62016-06-11 14:44:01 UTCSomeoneElse On further investigation (going through all the tag changes in here), I've reverted this for the reasons described above and in . Far more tag changes made things "more wrong" rather than just "differently wrong" or correct" ...
12016-06-05 03:36:15 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Way Astroturf Football Pitch (353663776) does not appear in the bing imagery. Does it exist? And is the name really 'Astroturf Football Pitch'?
22016-06-05 22:55:51 UTCDaniel-Jack Williamson Hi there, this is part of the new Auchmuty High School that has been built in the Auchmuty area of Glenrothes. The AstroTurf football pitch is referring to what that area is, as the pitch itself doesn't have a name as such. I thought that describing what it is would be more accurate. If I remember r...
32016-06-06 02:00:36 UTCWarin61 Ok,
I am slowly reducing sport=football tag to the appropriate football .. usually soccer in the UK. (Ausie rules in OZ, american_football in the USA)
It would be more acculturate to age it as

and remove the name tag. That would be truth in tagg...
12016-06-05 23:51:20 UTCWarin61 Way: 81158494
Corrected .. added more nodes ...Way was grossly distorted. I think this bot may add more errors than it merits running?
12016-05-28 10:54:51 UTCWarin61 I have added the tag sport= to leisure=pitch where visible in bing. Where there is more than one pitch - then I have separated out the pitches - e.g. tennis courts - each court is best mapped individually - thus you can tell how many courts and there orientation.
22016-05-28 11:21:29 UTCAngyork Thank you for the adjustments.
12016-05-12 09:46:51 UTCWarin61 Removed naming of tracks south of QAA line as 'Hay River Track'. One of these is the K1 line ... and has been for an extremely long time.
12016-05-11 00:50:21 UTCWarin61 Hi, moved Node: Hillston Post Office (2302362776) to corner - as per LPI Base Map and Austpost website address. Imagery has this as a burnt out shell.. added fixme for survey confirmation (and address information. .
12016-04-11 08:22:12 UTCMMN-o Hi! Are you sure this should be changed to use a dash? The defacto standard seems to be using underscore for spaces and I'll refer to Wikipedia as a reference source that writes the words separately:

Underscores generally also replace dashes when normalising...
22016-04-11 08:28:24 UTCMMN-o I found the wiki page now and it specifies "shot-put" (but there are ~50 "shot_put" and only 11 "shot-put"):

Also as I mentioned, tags are generally normalised so - turns to _, so it would be the same in Americ...
32016-04-12 21:35:19 UTCWarin61 A 'tradition'? Well OSM does not conform! For example opening_hours=Mo-Su 08:00-23:00
42016-04-12 21:40:00 UTCWarin61 Further? the 'taginfo' report page on 'characters in keys' says "Any valid Unicode character can appear in an OSM key but usually only lower case latin letters (a-z) and the underscore (_) are used. The colon (:) is often used as a separator character. "
12016-04-11 04:11:40 UTCWarin61 Hi, changed sport=shot_put to sport=shot-put, British English rather than American. See
12016-04-11 04:06:41 UTCWarin61 Hi, following some discussion on the tagging list .. I have changed the tag sport=shot_put to sport=shot-put .. British English spelling rather than American.
12016-04-08 07:52:43 UTCWarin61 Hi,

Some of these are sports .. I have added what I think are appropriate sports to some - hammer_throw;discus_throw and shot-put. I am yet to document them on the OSM wiki. See what you think.
e.g. Way: 407435291

12016-04-04 07:26:59 UTCWarin61 Hi,
changed the tags on this way to
name=Ballangharr Field
fixme=What kind of 'football? soccer, rugby?
12016-02-08 23:37:05 UTCWarin61 OSM inspector objects (throws error message) to placing duplicate tags on ways of relations... that makes it hard to see other errors. Please cease the duplication?
22016-02-09 03:10:37 UTCTheSwavu How about you please stop believing everything OSM Inspector says and start doing some thinking of your own?

OSM inspector is complaining because the inner ways are tagged with with a source:geometry that is the same as the outer ways. Having the same source for the inner and outer ways is a perf...
32016-03-31 04:17:00 UTCWarin61 The objection is to having the same tags on;

the relation, and

ways that are part of the relation.

From the wiki

" way(s) should be left untagged, unless they describe something in their own right. For example, a fore...
12016-03-30 10:17:38 UTCCloCkWeRX Nice work! I spent a bit of time with a list of Canberra schools (via the JOSM opendata plugin and; adding buildings, tennis courts, etc and a lot more detail.

I wonder if there's a similar list for SA schools we could use to find other likely sporting grounds
22016-03-30 21:17:14 UTCWarin61 I'm using overpass turbo with the wizard entry sport=football for the football... I think I have most of those done for OZ.. there are a great many in Europe though if you want to reduce their numbers.

I'm also targeting leisure=pitch without sport=* again using overpass turbo with the wizard e...
12016-03-29 20:40:56 UTCTheSwavu Ways with only names are not things. What you've done is tagged that these particular park boundaries have names which I know is not true and is the reason that they got cleaned up when I removed the other tags from the Wollemi relation.

If you want to indicate that there are things on the ground...
22016-03-29 22:43:24 UTCWarin61 Thanks for pointing out the missing 'thing' aspect .. corrected, rather than removed.
I know they are there, The LPI base map confirms it.
12016-03-28 22:33:18 UTCWarin61 I personal KNOW that 'Grassy Mountain' is known by that name in the local area. And it appears on the LPI base map.


These tags are not redundant nor duplicates...
12016-03-22 23:40:36 UTCWarin61 'Cremorne Oval' now looks to be be gone. there are two buildings over lapping it .. some tables and chairs ... way 47474686 .. tags removed .. note tag added.
12016-03-17 04:38:25 UTCWarin61 Bing shows this building ... Way: 400524218

But LPI Imagery does not. Placed fixme on it.
12016-03-15 10:40:51 UTCWarin61 way 61726944 and others are not basketball .. they are netball, as shown on bing imagery.
12016-03-15 10:10:52 UTCWarin61 way 55780911 - named Auckland Netball Centre
Has tag sport=basketball.
Viewing bing imagery this is a set of tennis courts. I have tagged the pitches with tennis, but left this way as you set it. Possibly the use has changed?
12016-03-14 22:43:31 UTCWarin61 Hi,
This changeset has removed tags from some ways ... they were tagged as tracks. Why did you remove the tags?

Using the LPI Imagery I can see some of them ... possibly better tagged as path?
ways 57018649 and 57018650. were examined, there may be more.
12016-03-07 06:04:13 UTCWarin61 Way: 248981539 added namd Boree Track. Looks to have better location data in LPI Base Map.
12016-02-27 01:17:11 UTCWarin61 Corrected sport tennis to netball for 6 ways.
12016-02-25 02:10:18 UTCWarin61 Removed name from Way: Garigal National Park (218612893)

Relation: Garigal National Park (5989695) now carries the name and correct boundaries for this.
12016-02-25 02:07:06 UTCWarin61 Removed name and national park for relation 2978558 .. left as wood.

Relation: Garigal National Park (5989695) has correct boundaries for this park.
12016-02-21 05:41:48 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I, or someone else, has stuffed up!!!
This has left at least 2 of these areas mucked up. I am not happy.. to say the least.

Could you let me know the web site where you got the info and I'll go through it and reenter the data ... my apology of the errors!
22016-02-21 06:05:27 UTCJames Livingston, it was one of the really early datasets they released. I think it had all the National Parks in it, but I can't find the exact details
12016-02-18 22:26:39 UTCWarin61 A good source would be LPI base map - faint purple lines show admin boundaries. It may be possible to download the boundaries directly from their site too.
12016-02-14 06:52:47 UTCTheSwavu Hmm, interesting hypothetical...

Are Shiers and Keith Smith Avenues the roads at ground level or the roads on the bridges above them?

Guess it really doesn't matter.
22016-02-14 08:11:16 UTCWarin61 As I was 'only' adding road names.. I did not observe that!
Had considerable discussion in the past (tagging list) on layer=0 not being 'ground level' by some!
As you say .. matters little. As a concept I take layer=0 to be nominal ground level. I did observe a creek at layer=-1 (probably to avoi...
32016-02-14 21:12:02 UTCWarin61 Where a main road splits - so that a residential service is provided at the side while a main thoroughfare is provided at the center ... both road carry the same name. Same thing happens here? The higher road is what the LIP Base Map shows, the lower road is hidden on that map.
12016-02-11 23:51:48 UTCWarin61 Updated.
LPI Admin Boundaries used. This adds some areas, but is not so 'good' on the coastline. Probably the legal boundary?
Added website link, updated opening hours from website - sunrise to sunset. ?May not apply to the 'whole' park?
12016-02-10 05:12:29 UTCWarin61 Way 40510826 looks to be tennis courts on Bing Imagery .. not netball and certainly not football.
22016-02-12 12:29:24 UTCSK53 This was mapped way before Bing imagery was available. Things may have changed of course, but as usual the best answer is a ground survey.
12016-02-08 22:46:48 UTCWarin61 Relation: Bungabbee State FOrest (5905459) is not closed... typo in name too.
12016-02-08 04:37:24 UTCWarin61 Hi'
Way 132327313 tagged sport=netbal corrected to netball. I have also separated out the courts to individual courts.. and added others as shown by bing imagery.
12016-01-31 02:52:00 UTCWarin61 Changed northern boundary to comply with Newnes Sate forest boundary from LPI Admin boundaries. I believe the LPI Imagery has good definition for the fence line too .. but not changed that.
12016-01-27 21:16:19 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
12016-01-27 21:15:45 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
12016-01-27 21:14:32 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
12016-01-27 21:13:37 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
22016-01-28 01:03:52 UTCriblit Years ago, before we had good data I marked a section near Glenbrook as the National Park boundary from local knowledge, but not the rest.

I would remove the way
12016-01-27 21:12:40 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
22016-01-27 23:31:37 UTCLeon K I didn't even realise i'd touched this :-)

I've been following your posts on the list and happy for you to improve these.
12016-01-27 21:12:09 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
12016-01-27 21:11:37 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
12016-01-27 21:11:12 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
12016-01-27 21:10:32 UTCWarin61 Presently way 169174227 is tagged;

name=Blue Mountains National Park


This covers a very large area ... that is;

part of the Blue Mountains National Park (not the northern section)

all of;
Yerrandrie State Conservation Area
Yerrandrie Regional Park
Nattai Nati...
12016-01-20 22:40:14 UTCWarin61 This added a name to a road - "Corkwood Woongarrah, New South Wales" and also oneway=no .. and not added any maxspeed.
This bot is eitehr broken or not doing waht you think.
Way 26539309.
Recomend more care in creating bots. And more testing of the bot!!
12016-01-10 06:36:42 UTCLeon K Guess you didn't mean to name all these junctions "Edensor Road"?
22016-01-10 06:37:26 UTCLeon K Guess you didn't mean to name all these junctions "Edensor Road"?
32016-01-10 08:06:42 UTCWarin61 Nooooooooo !!!!!!!!!!!
42016-01-10 08:52:26 UTCWarin61 Working on it
Josm find - type:node name=Edensor Road
then delete name and source:name...
52016-01-10 09:27:28 UTCLeon K :-) No dramas. Was going to offer to help but looks like you've got it under control.
62016-01-10 09:41:20 UTCWarin61 I hope that is fixed now....
Apologies. I'll check it tomorrow - things to do.

Complements for catching it ... how did you come across it?
72016-01-10 11:26:43 UTCLeon K I've been doing a few random cleanups based on the new imagery. Just happened to notice the name appearing at a bunch of the junctions.
12016-01-08 01:45:27 UTCWarin61 I have removed the name and leaf type from this relation!!!
Area encompasses National Parks and private property and other State forests too.
Trees are both needle leaved and broad leaved.
12016-01-01 06:15:21 UTCWarin61 What is the source?
Specifically way 375640928 ... LPI has that area as a state forest ... not a conservation area.
12015-12-27 09:51:40 UTCWarin61 Hi,
'We' now have LPI base map data - you will find this much easier to use to plot out the National Parks outer boundaries, not so good for park to park boundaries. I think the LPI data is better than the dep of environment. It does include State Forest too. See what you think... I have looked at ...
12015-12-19 02:07:09 UTCSomeoneElse Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

I noticed this edit and just happened to spot that isn't actually joined to the roads to the north and south. This means that any routers using OpenStreetMap data won't be able to route along this road. If you like ...
22015-12-19 02:49:05 UTCWarin61 HI,
I'm not an ID user .. So I used JOSM to check this area.. ('validation') this reports 14 errors and 49 warnings. Of these 12 are 'way end node near other highway' .. these should be checked if they should be joined. Of course the 'errors' too should be checked... and I have just done some reduc...
12015-12-16 05:43:59 UTCWarin61 Way 25968044 Barrington Tops National Park ... WAY too large!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know that part of this area is a state forest .. camped there many times!

What is your source of this claim?

The NSW Department of Land and Property Information has, I think, much better information .....
12015-12-16 03:46:39 UTCWarin61 Way 232137774 looks to be way too big!!!
The area tagged as State Forest has National Parks inside it!
I will delete this way .. and add data from LPI for the various state forests and National Parks .. smaller areas.
12015-12-15 01:00:59 UTCWarin61 What us the source of the information?

NSW Department of Land and Property Information (way 385932033) has a different boundary for this nature reserve. I have added it .. and made this way into 'obsolete' .. Please comment back as to if this should be deleted.
My changeset for this 35957441.
22015-12-15 08:19:48 UTCkeba_saa I was personally there for research in sept. 2012. The information is based on a printed map I got from the "ranger" of the "NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service". The paper map had enough landmarks to trace it using Bing, although I mostly used it for place names. It may ha...
32015-12-15 20:37:39 UTCWarin61 OK. I think the LPI information includes an easement .. possibly an old stock route. I think the NP&WS do not want to advertise these easements.
Also your data has corrected my error in overlooking a line.
I have 'updated' the boundary to the LPI data.
42015-12-15 21:16:41 UTCkeba_saa Awesome thanks. Yes there's a lot they don't want to advertise as this reserve not meant for visits by the public or use with livestock, but purely for protection purposes.
12015-12-13 11:39:40 UTCWarin61 Please be carefull in reducing detail. Better with too much rather than too little. I generally add detail that then reduce it! Zooming out general reduces the detail anyway ... only when you zoom in do you see the detail.. and that is when you want the detail.
Secondly .. better imagery is now av...
22015-12-14 03:44:06 UTCmrpulley Just a note about Willow Vale Road - I think it doesn't joint the highway here (just the ramp). If you use imagery, it may be the old imagery taken just prior to the newly-opened reconstructed highway. (LPI imagery still shows the old highway.)
32015-12-14 22:44:37 UTCmrpulley I've checked my voice recording from my recent trip - Willow Vale Road definitely does not join Princes Highway.
42016-02-07 04:32:12 UTCmrpulley Just letting you know that I have corrected the junction of Willow Vale Road. See changeset at Note current imagery (Bing, Mapbox and LPI) is out of date.
12015-11-04 10:44:56 UTCWarin61 Carefull is for the area of Chatswood .. not necessarily the residential area only. e.g. this includes a golf course that could easily be excluded. It also overlaps previously tagged residential areas.
Warin61 has contributed to 389 changeset discussions(s) with a total of 710 comment(s)