Hi

The 'basketball' is actually netball, a very popular sport in Australia. Changed.

Hi,
Welcome to OSM...

The relation for Quealy Winery is not 'closed' so it does not form an area. See relation/14729792

Both members of the relation have no other tags .. so they can be combined into one way .. and that single way can then be closed to form an area. Once that is done the tags from the relation can be transferred to the single way and then the relation deleted...

That make sense?

Hi
This changeset has be partially reverted to restore the Tutanning Nature Reserve relation.

This means that way/963923959 has been restore to its previous location and that the tag highway=track has been removed from it. This way is the boundary for the Nature Reserve. It is not a track over its entire length.

Suggestion? Map the track as a new way without using the existing way?

Hi,
I have made some changes to the cycle/foot way with the new Tasmanian ferry. Would be good if you could have a look at it .. in particular the railway crossings at the southern end .. one of them could now be razed?

Hi,

The DCS Imagery has beeter resolution than the Bing Imagery, so I'd use that in preference to Bing.

Relation 14728687 has an error, the outer ways cannot touch. As a house it would be one structure so should have a simple single way. If you want to indicate the separate roof structures that would be entered as 'building:part=roof layer=1 roof:shape=* roof:colour=*
roof:material=*

See building:part=*

-----------------------------
I have left the bad relation for you to fix... if you need help, ask.

And now
"Once there is no real risk of remapping them by person thinking that this objects are still existing such elements should be deleted from OSM."
osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Oh ..
osm.wiki/Demolished_Railway#What_is_sufficient_to_map_a_former_railway

Much of this is the case of "without any traces whatsoever. Not mappable. " ...

The 'standard map' (for OSM editing) does show the disused and abandoned. I have no idea for other renders.

However when I down load an area to map it .. the razed etc are also downloaded.
This is a problem when people try to map new things, the old things lead to mapping things that never existed like railway=crossing where a new footway/highway is also mapped over a now non existent railway line.
People mapping new things may not see the old stuff on the new imagery .. and simply delete it, leading to edit wars.
People map things like an old embankment for old railway lines .. right through existing roads

A possible reason for these tags of things that no longer exist is for use in OHM, I have suggested making a change to the OSM wiki to state a 'recommendation that these things be move to OHM'.

I can usually find the soccer goals .. even without nets. Not visible in Bing, Esri .. arr there they are in Mapbox.. I did miss them .. thanks now mapped.

I have raise the question of why the tag razed (and others) exist in OSM on the talk list, I have suggest that the OSM wiki recommend moving things with these tags to OHM.

Repeat...

Most of these tracks are no longer here... why have you mapped them as 'disused' and 'abandoned'?

The only section that I can see with some existence are on the peir, as there don't connect with anything I'd think ruins may be the best OSM description of them.. personally - remnants?

Many of these no longer exist. Tagging them 'disused' and 'abandoned' means they are still there... and that is not the case.. they are gone, vaporized, vanished, no trace...

The change set states the source as LPI (now DCS) Imagery...
Six maps is the commercial arm of LPI/DCS .. and the source for the names tagged on the ways is Six maps.. I think that is an error and you used the LPI Base Map .. as that is what is available within OSM editors.

Please be carefull when stating the source .. and state the source really used ..

Hi,

There are several problems ...

Example: relation/14723626 One outer way intersect with another outer way... Outer ways should not cross one another..
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=144.99877&lat=-38.32423&zoom=19&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

For the rest .. well you can see them here https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=144.99977&lat=-38.32261&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Work on one of them, the above site updates daily .. so check it is 'correct' the next day .. and if you have it right then do the rest of them... well that is what I'd do.

The advantage of putting them in OHM is that the start and finish dates are supported .. and the old data is encouraged. The argument is that OSM is for current conditions not the past.
I think ORM should consider using both OSM and OHM, OSM for the present .. and OHM for the past when the users want that.

Hi
The raised railway belongs in Open Historic Map ..

"In locations where the railway has been replaced by new buildings and roads, the mapping of such features becomes out of scope for OpenStreetMap."

Sixmaps are COPYRIGHT!!!!!

They MUST NOT BE USED in OSM!

LPI (now DCS) are to be used... I can only assume you used the LIP base map as that is what is provided though the OSM editors...

Hi,

The pitch 27630391 you say has soccer played on it... yet I cannot see any goal posts? Is this just for social games .. without goals?

I have separated the baseball/softball pitches up - there are 3 of them. My thinking is the more detail the better.

Hi
Private?

Named as Mores Road.. marked as tertiary on DCS Base Map .. I don't think this through road can be 'private' in any way?

Perhaps you mean the Uni research place .. but that is only 'on' the road .. the road itself is open access?

No response... I hope this is not a typical MSFTOpenMaps action.