Hi,
There is an error in relation/14893343 (building mall). Outer ways of multiplygons cannot share segments...
In this instance look at osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon#One_outer_and_one_inner_ring

Hi

Water in this area is usually intermittent (OSM tag intermittent=yes). Some is seasonal (OSM tag seasonal=wet)

There are a few Quality Assurance Tools available. I use OSM Inspector .. mainly so I can check my work.

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=145.45605&lat=-30.87017&zoom=6&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

Hi,
Ther is a duplication of a node on way 1112435432 .. this causes crossing of the way.

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=152.49971&lat=-32.16812&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

Hi,

OSM multipolygon relation outer ways cannot share segments. So relation/14889547 is in error. I would use building as the footprint of the total building - not two separate ways. If you want to separate the structure for some reason then use building:part.

I'm leaving this for you to fix as you see fit.

Hi,

Welcome to OSM!

Multipolygon outer ways cannot share segments - so relation 14877302 is in error. There is no need to make this a relation .. better as 2 ways carrying the tags and no relation.

I have deleted the relation and places the tag landuse=residential on the two ways.

For the final time .. I did NOT add any tags to this ... you will have to go to the mapper that added them and ask them.

Out.

I quote from the OSM talk list
"Andy Mabbett andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk
Sun Nov 6 19:25:59 UTC 2022

Someone has deleted the way for the pedestrian bridge at Morbi, India.

This seems to be in error, as - despite the recent tragic collapse -
the superstructure is largely still in place, and still spans the
river, according to press coverage

The way had been marked as impassable. Can someone restore that, please?"

The deletion was don by a non local. I am not local. Your not local. Shale we wait and see what a local does? Or do you want to delete the way and remove the past information from OSM?

I an done with it.

Someone has deleted the way for the pedestrian bridge at Morbi, India.

This seems to be in error, as - despite the recent tragic collapse -
the superstructure is largely still in place, and still spans the
river, according to press coverage

The way had been marked as impassable. Can someone restore that, please?"

OSm Inspector refreshes once a day. I keep an eye on it to pick up my own and those admin boundaries that get broken with road changes.

Reverted.

Restores wetland within Lake Baghdad. Fixed tags and water way crossing.

Hi
The multipolygone 'sand' relation/14723827 was in error... I have fixed that by removing an outer that was within the outer...

But .. I don't think this is sand at all!!! See relation/14723827

Hi,

Multipolygon relation outer ways cannot share segments. So the Greensborough Walk relation is in error.

I have:
deleted the relation.
Combined the 3 ways into one.
Placed the tags on the single way.

This simplifies the data and makes it easier to understand.

Further reading ...
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2022-November/087868.html

This changeset did not alter any tags.
It simply deleted the way.

Not iD/JOSM but that OSM Inspector website...

And also the OSM wiki says
"Anything that is not a valid multipolygon according to this standard (e.g., polygons with intersecting rings) should also be considered an invalid multipolygon relation"
see osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon

Look at the history of the way to see who really added what?
way/604295549/history

I added no tags to the way, I simply restored the way from a deletion. You can see this if you look at the way history.

Don't think your note will attract much attention. Making comments on the appropriate changeset should get more attention and probably better information as to the present status. This is not the changeset that introduced 'construction' nor 'access=no' etc...

Hi,

You have created a duplication of the river ...

Suggest you delete this one Machchhu (14759437, v2)
and retain the older one Machchhu (227972084) v28

way/227972084

Hi again,

Same problem with relation/14867988 scrub.

I reverted the deletion of the way - the tags there will have to be discussed with those that put them there.

Given that some money was recently spent on the bridge and it was just reopened for the festival, I would think there would be fair pressure to restore it. It may take some time for the determination of what is to be done (restricted numbers?). In the mean time access=no should dis-wade routers as would highway=construction. I'm not certain about the bridge=yes ... Andy Malbert thinks there are enough remnants for that to be ok, I'd like to signify it is 'damaged' .. possibly a new life cycle prefix .. could also be used for damages by floods/fires/landsides/earthquakes...

HI,
This changeset has been reverted.

The way contains some history and should not be deleted . Some elements of the bridge remain. The local mappers have already tagged it access=no and construction.