Hi,
Unfortunately someone has tagged the boundary of the National Park as natural=wood. Move this tree area changes the Park boundary. I have reverted this part of your changes to restore the Park Boundary.
I have also removed the tree tagging from the Parks boundary. You may well come across this problem again, keep an eye out for it.

Please make a new way/relation with natural=wood for the tree area around here.

Hi,
Welcome to OSM.

Items only need one main tag - so man_made=storage_tank makes building=yes redundant.

The LPI Base Map will give you the boundaries of the fire station and that can be tagged amenity=fire_station together with the name, operator etc. Then hte things inside that don't need to be included in a relation, just map them.
I have edited this fire station to how I think it should be mapped. Please check it and see what you think.

Very good.

Hi,
The relation for the 'Coastal Cycleway' does not appear to be part of the 'Coastal Cycleway.
It would not be possible to get the info from the LPI.

I have renamed it to Eden Cycleway, and made it in to a local cycle network.

I am combining the present info in OSM 'NSW Coastal Cycleway' into a master route and having the sections named after the local area. Might be better.. see how it goes.

It is not required to add U turn nor right turn restrictions at roundabouts! Simply marking the roundabout oneway is sufficient.

Possibly service=lane... rather than driveway which is normally for a single residence.

Thanks ...
Possibly then it should be highway=residential? It is very minor though. There would not be many driveways with names .. I wonder if it iscouncil maintained?

Best to find an example and see how that is done?

Poor example - best I can do for the moment
way/506199651
Note the way immediate to the north is also Crown Gardens but has not been mapped as such.

Or for multiple levels - building parts
way/556721105#map=18
This is the 'base' way with 3 other ways forming the towers on top.

Hope that helps.

Hi,

Where you have used addr:housename=* are these not the names of the houses? And they would not be used for addresses? So would not they be better tagged as name=*?

Hi,
node/3343155079 has addr:housename=386. Should this not be addr:housenumber=386?

relation/10843748 for a building with multiple levels... not how it is done.

First multipolygons outer ways cannot share 'segments', in this case the walls of each building would have to be separate.

Second .. if it is one building then it should be one way for the base, and then separate ways for each higher level.

In this case I think I would tag each way with the building=* and the building:levels=*. Note that the building:levels=* should be one number not a series of them. The relation I would leave with the name and address but I would make the relation type=site rather than multipolygone.

An alternative is to use building:part=*.

Hi,

What is the source of this information?

I did a google and that comes up with historic landings e.g. Captain Cook. A search on NPWS Helicopter got nothing.

Читать
osm.wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments

Этот набор изменений также сломал внешние пути для часового пояса NSW.

What is the source of the population data???

Каков источник данных о населении?

@Hb -

Kindly correct your tagging.

Once again this has broken admin boundaries.

Hi,
Some of these 'names' are descriptions. Name tag is for the name only. Some alterations done.

Please make comments on your changesets!

osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

This changeset broke an admin boundary

What were you doing?
Repaired boundaries for NSW, Vic, + London Mallee

Not a meadow.

>What is bad with the current state of the objects in the map?

Cons:

Increases data bloat.

Increases probability of future editing errors.

Increases mapper work load

Increases render work load

Pros:
None.

------------------------
There is nothing 'wrong' with having the trees as a continuous area, any overlap is not a problem unless the thing overlapped is another land cover.