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. Some don't look to exist .. and there associated facilities get bad reviews anyway! I have left one that identifies the mine?, the other prior node is for a museum. Will have to go beak can check that one again after thinking about it.

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/314946608 wet and wild tagged tourism=them park ... here I can agree .. I probably simply checked for tourism=attraction duplication .. not tourism=* duplication ...

Note - I have made the corrections to these two ... and will check the rest soonest.

Would have checked these for duplicates at the time of entry ... will recheck on the two you are concerned with for speed.

There looks to be rather a large number of 'beets'! Spinach beet, silver beet, Spinach beet, yellow, red, white, Italian beetroot, field beet... http://www.webcitation.org/6Fu9TOBWl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plantnames.unimelb.edu.au%2FSorting%2FBeta.html

Humm ... perhaps best left alone?

Hi,
Way: 502A/1 56 (420832495) has crop=beet this is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

hi
Way: 235298166 has crop=beet this is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

hi
Way: 353475627 has crop=beet this is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

Hi,
Way: 437773357 crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

hi,
Way: Schlag: Kröll, Wolfgang (442460302) crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

hi
Way: 428129376 crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

Hi,
Way: Burak (310845843) crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

hi
Way: 443049326 crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

Hi
Way: свекольное поле (433554192) crop=beet is USA English, crop=beetroot is UK English

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 lodged at LPI NSW."

How frequently the Base Map is updated (if at all?) I don't know ... but the accuracy you gave are for the initial production of the base map completed in 1994. Given the accuracy is better in the east (where more detailed maps were used) I'd think it is very good here. The question is ... what is the date of the Base Map data?

Many roads no longer follow the original path, and the legal easements may not have changed. This leads to conflicts where the public abuses the privilege (Root Hog Fire Trail springs to mind) ... where the public behaves then things are left in a practical working manner.

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 remove some things that were snapped together to better define some items, mainly water courses. And choosing which of the ways is best is a choice that should be made with good data. The LPI Base Map is very usefull in those regards.

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 the boundary (as confirmation only .. not for copying) http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/visit-a-park/parks/Kuringgai-Chase-National-Park/map/ the southern boundary looks correct. However if there are NP signs on the ground by the NPWS that claim the southern boundary is further south then I'd tend to go with that ... my experience says that their signs are conservative in area .. probably to avoid problems and costs with surveys.

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.

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 protection issue with casually walkers at the low water times - avoids jurisdiction issues? I don't know... but the LPI data indicates towards a low water boundary.

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.

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 roads. Oh ... paths .. these would be too narrow for a 4wd... if a 4wd can travel down it then it is a track.
See what you think.