Your identical size and identical orientation buildings copy-pasted with complete disregard for reality are horrible.

The logic I was following is the mapping of the built-up area of the agglomeration, so independently of administrative boundaries (which I usually filter out in JOSM - because I have no information about them, so I don't touch them). Aligning residential areas with administrative boundaries is a possibility - albeit a rare practice, but they are usually independent because, contrary to the residential areas, the administrative boundaries are not directly observable and land uses are usually not aligned with them. Agglomerations typically extend well beyond official city limits and the contrary exists too when only part of an administrative circumscription is built up.

The wetlands are a different story. I excluded them from that relation because I observed on orbital imagery that in Kampala they almost always correspond to the boundary of built-up areas - and you explained why this is the most common case. But of course residential areas encroaching on wetlands are a common occurrence - for example in the last twenty years Dakar has had terrible problems with that, although the situation is improving. So, yes - while aligning landuse=residential with wetland boundaries was a practical expedient for a first approach to mapping Kampala's urban area, it is by no means the last word and finer description is superior... But this has to start somewhere and the lack of a landuse=residential to encompass Kampala's built up extent is troubling.

You mean relation/12571016 ? This is standard practice everywhere - look at Conakry here: osm.org/#map=12/9.6143/-13.5630 - or anywhere else really. Yes, it is the norm in Paris too: relation/1988489, relation/10967048 and relation/10837210 for example. landuse=residential says: "The landuse tag is mostly used for larger areas and not at parcel granularity". It represents the extent of the agglomeration. Inside, there is room for detail such as place=neighborhood, landuse=industrial etc. Of course More granularity would be even better, and this could be broken down to smaller pieces - but mapping the agglomeration is the standard Openstreetmap way to start that process.

This building does not correspond to recent imagery. What imagery are you using ?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103903173

Hello. Can you please explain the presence of an alpine hut in the Uganda context ? node/8658957118
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103480505

Hello. All these buildings are false - please delete them. What old imagery are you using ?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103482789

Hello. All these buildings are false - please delete them. What old imagery are you using ?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103482310

Reviewed: good.

Thanks for adding this feature. I complemented your entry by adding religion=christian, which makes it a church. If you are so inclined, you can even add a denomination - cf. denomination=*#Christian_denominations
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103278241

Please stop using Bing imagery: it is outdated and misaligned, therefore your buildings are wrong, which causes cleanup work.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103132086

Please stop using Bing imagery: it is outdated and misaligned, therefore your buildings are wrong, which causes cleanup work.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103131833

Please stop using Bing imagery: it is outdated and misaligned, therefore your buildings are wrong, which causes cleanup work.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103131487

Please stop using Bing imagery: it is outdated and misaligned, therefore your buildings are wrong, which causes cleanup work.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103131338

Please stop using Bing imagery: it is outdated and misaligned, therefore your buildings are wrong, which causes cleanup work.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103131130

Thanks for the attention to detail !

Are there really two Internet cafés West of Total ? Or is that a duplicate ?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103091585

I would be curious to see a from-the-ground picture of this unmarked highway crossing.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103063239

> C'est un import automatique qu'on ne peut pas adapter autrement

Accordons le bénéfice du doute: disons il s'agit d'incompétence plutôt que de pur foutage de gueule. Dites à votre fournisseur d'outils que l'adaptation est possible, demandez-lui un devis et si vous avez un doute demandez-nous conseil !

Are you sure that those buildings are not orthogonal ? On the imagery they look orthogonal to me...
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103025544

But you mention source being https://services.digitalglobe.com/earthservice/tmsaccess/tms/1.0.0/DigitalGlobe:ImageryTileService@EPSG:3857@jpg/{zoom}/{x}/{-y}.jpg?connectId=ca613e76-811f-46e7-9e1d-84f6795441c2 and that requires password...